Comments

1. #1 dominich

   April 7, 2009

   Cute in the same way that the airbrushed models on magazine covers are beautiful.

2. #2 Kitty'sBitch

   April 7, 2009

   Aaaaaawwwwwwwww
   Thanks Greg, I needed that.

3. #3 Spiv

   April 7, 2009

   Don’t kid yourself guys: everyone knows atheists don’t have feelings and are therefore unable to distinguish cute from evil. Nice try, Mr. Laden. We’re on to you.

4. #4 ppnl

   April 7, 2009

   I’m guessing the head has been made larger, the eyes are made larger and the features of the face have been softened. Cuteness is a biological response.

5. #5 llewelly

   April 7, 2009

   Wow. That is the ugliest puppy I have ever seen. Poor thing.
   
   It looks like some deranged photoshopist hybridized a cat and a dog.

6. #6 Rob W

   April 7, 2009

   @ppnl — you think this was photoshopped? Go out and see some real puppies; they are *crazy* cute. The “cute-response” features are incredibly exaggerated. Why go to the work of photoshopping when all you need is a camera and a bunch of puppies? See dailypuppy.com or somesuch for examples of amateur photos.

   Human newborns have nothing on most animals’ little ones.

7. #7 Tom L

   April 7, 2009

   It is two things, chiefly:
   1) The angle of the eye causes the white to show, which ever so slightly anthropomorphizes they expression in the eyes;
   2) The dark smear on the muzzle (which may or may not have been digitally added), clearly mimicking a smile.

   (atheist scientist mode off)

   That, and it’s a cuddly, soft, fuzzy widdle baby. Awwwwwww…