Web debate: Is this a raven or a rabbit? | TribLIVE.com

Web debate: Is this a raven or a rabbit?

Samson X Horne
This screenshot from a tweet shared by scientist Dan Quintana shows a hand stroking a raven, but many thought the animal was a rabbit.

Here we go again.

Is the dress blue or white? Is the voice saying “yanny” or “laurel”?

Another question is plaguing mankind.

Scientist Dan Quintana shared an optical illusion video on Twitter last week that went viral while simultaneously sending many users ranting “raven” and down the rabbit hole trying to figure out if what they saw was a cuddly mammal or a common bird known for munching on carcasses.

“Rabbits love getting stroked on their nose,” the researcher said.

But is it a rabbit? Or was a “mad scientist” simply throwing out the chum.

Turns out a raven went viral for looking like a rabbit.

Interestingly enough, ravens are known for mimicking other species, but in a different way. In fact, MentalFloss.com wrote: “Ravens can mimic many noises and have been known to imitate wolves or foxes to attract them to carcasses that the raven isn’t capable of breaking open.”

Also, some can talk…

How did the scientist leave that out?

Even the not-so-politically correct crowd got into the discussion.

Quintana says the footage was not originally from him and he shared from another source.

What did you think the animal was when you first saw the video?

Samson X Horne is a Tribune-Review digital producer. You can contact Samson at 412-320-7845, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: News | World | More Lifestyles
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.