It's not just you, there's an entire community of people who have decided that four sentences of introduction is too much--Twitter. Writing that not only is ae

It's not just you, there's an entire community of people who have decided that four sentences of introduction is too much--Twitter. Writing that not only is aesthetic but informative, is exactly what I want here. > Is this what Smithsonian readers want? To feel like they read about science but not actually have done so? That's simply not true, this article is definitely about science. > Plus I’m still curious about what we’ve actually learned from this about the nature of language. Then you'd have to read more than four sentences of the article. "To some scientists, Kanzi’s intellectual feats demonstrated clearly that language was not unique to human beings." "The controversy masked an uncomfortable truth: No one agreed on what the difference between language and communication actually was." The article then goes on to describe a wide variety of events which explain what happened with the Bonobos, highlighting events which might be indicators of discoveries and difficulties with collecting scientific observations about Bonobos and language/communication.