“Science whores”

Not the same as perceived experts. These are people who actually have the academic credentials and occupations needed to call themselves scientists. The science whore is willing to twist real scientific facts and findings in order to protect the pit bull. The science whore can be motivated by greed. Wanting to keep making money on the very lucrative dog-talk circuit, s/he sells both soul and credibility for a few dollars. Some might be motivated by fear, since all who speak or publish the truth about the pit bull is subject to an organized smear and bullying campaign.

How to spot a science whore: The science whore can fill an entire book with detailed explanation of how all working breeds have ended up with genetically determined, strongly heritable behavioral characteristics that can’t be trained out of a dog — and then towards the end of the book suddenly denies that this is also true of the pit bull. The science whore either mixes up relevant variables or ignores them altogether. In a discussion about sustained, maiming and killing attacks by dogs large and heavy enough to actually kill an adult human, the science whore will publish an article proclaiming, for example, that ‘dachshunds bite the most‘.

The list includes a great many people with PhDs as well as many publishing academics. It does not include personnel of the ‘National Canine Research Council‘, which is not a scientific organization.

Author and animal behaviorist Alexandra Semyonova (nonlineardogs.com)


DogsBite.org community members Landshark and CKing coined this term, which combines the study of pit bull owners, parasocial interaction and parasitology. In brief, parasocial relationships are one sided, such as a relationship between celebrities and fans and are based upon the illusion of interaction (via television, film or radio) rather than actual social interaction. Parasitology, on the other hand, involves the study of parasites and their hosts. When combined with pit nutters, the term “parapitology” is born.

  • Pit nutters live in a parasocial world with one another. They always believe they are part of an “intimate posse” as seen in mauling threads following a pit bull attack and on nutter boards. These relationships, however, are nearly always distantly based anonymous users who act together by creating an echo chamber of Maul Talk themes including: media sensationalism; canine racism; PETA murders dogs and more.
  • Parasitology symbolizes this parasocial world and how its echo chamber infects more pit nutters, pit bull apologists, science whoresmedia members and lawmakers by creating a parasitic hosting environment for the Pit Bull Cause. Persons infected by this one sided cause may be oblivious to it, as well as to the fact that parts of their brain have become germination pools spawning more parapit nutters.


Pitiology is a term derived from the DogsBite.org community. It refers to the study of pit bull owners by animal groups and behaviorists bent upon pitying and sympathizing with these owners (See also: Science whores). An example can be seen in the Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy report issued in 2000. The Center is rooted in the humane treatment of animals and veterinarian practices, not in policies designed to protect the public from dangerous animals, such as pit bulls. This bias clearly shows in the report.

(Pit bull propaganda) – “For the first half of this century, pit bulls enjoyed a positive image in America. During World War I, these dogs stood for American courage and were featured in a series of patriotic wartime posters.”
(Pit bull propaganda) – “The popular media commonly portrays pit bulls as demonic animals – unpredictable and savage in their behavior toward humans. For example, the headline of an article in U.S. News and World Report (1987) proclaimed that pit bulls were “The Most Dangerous in…”
(Pitying and sympathizing) – “Our work suggests that nonhuman animals [aka pit bulls] also can be stigmatized, although they will not have a conscious awareness of this perception. However, as part of a human_animal team, their owners can experience the taintedness that is commensurate with stigmatization and resort to various techniques to mitigate…”
– Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy Report

“Interspecies dyslexia”

Science whores also use science babble, such as Dr. Nicholas Dodman, director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at Tufts New England Veterinary Medical Center. Dodman apparently treats nasty rottweilers, pit bulls and “slavering German shepherds” with Prozac. According to a 2000 article published in Jewish World Review, Dodman used the term “interspecies dyslexia” in his book, Dogs Behaving Badly, to describe why “bad” dogs bite children.

PSYCHOBABBLE: Nicholas Dodman, author of Dogs Behaving Badly, explains that dogs who bite small children aren’t necessarily vicious. Instead, they are afflicted with “interspecies dyslexia” — ie, an inability to differentiate between genuine threats and humans who are harmless, or from the dog perspective, “pink and ouchy.” – Evan Gahr