text:
Talk:Inverse gambler's fallacy

Hint that the assumptions are wrong
The German article links to an article by Bostrom, which proves that the IGF is wrong:

N. Bostrom: Anthropic Bias, Observation Selection Effects in Science and Philosophy. Routledge, 2002, ISBN 0-415-93858-9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.200.146.119 (talk) 13:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

The passage from the German Wiki:

''Bostrom hat zudem aufgezeigt, wie das von Hacking angegebene Beispiel, welches zum umgekehrten Spielerfehlschluss führt, modifiziert werden müsste, so dass es tatsächlich mit der anthropischen Argumentation vergleichbar wäre. Um selektiven Beobachtungseffekten Rechnung zu tragen, müsste demnach in Hackings Beispiel mit dem Würfelspiel ein Spieler solange außerhalb der Spielhalle warten, bis eine Doppel-Sechs geworfen wurde. Unter diesen modifizierten Bedingungen wäre der umgekehrte Spielerfehlschluss aber kein Fehlschluss mehr. Vielmehr könnte ein Spieler unter diesen Bedingungen, wenn er nach einer geworfenen Doppel-Sechs in die Spielhalle eingelassen wird, tatsächlich zu recht schließen, dass bereits eine mehr oder weniger große Anzahl von Würfen stattgefunden hat.''

Minor grammar correction
Changed in the sentence,

"A rebuttal paper[2] by John Leslie points out a difference between the observation of double sixes and the observation of fine tuning, namely that the former is not necessary (the roll could have come out differently) while the latter is necessary (our universe must support life, which means ex hypothesi that we must see fine tuning).

in the parenthetical statement, "(the roll could have come out differently)", "differently" to "different". The word is not modifying the "coming out" process, like the dice hitting the backboard harder and coming back farther, but the result. As it was, it's like writing, "I scored lowly on the test." It was awkward at best and I would argue, grammatically incorrect. "Different" describes (the results of) the "roll", doesn't modify anything verbal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.183.102.137 (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Not Real
Theoretically, the fallacy seems sound but unfortunately it does not represent reality. Toss a coin n times and count how many times it comes up heads. While the statistical probability is exactly 50% with each toss of the coin, over time the statistical likelihood of recurrence will diminish exponentially with each toss.

The Gambler Fallacy argument is invalid in multiverse theories.

- First, I don't think we need to be taking stances on whether inferences to multiple worlds do or do not commit the inverse gambler's fallacy. There is supposed to be a little neutrality, especially when it comes to controversial philosophical issues. That's why I originally just said "Defenders of the argument under criticism usually appeal to an observational selection effect that, allegedly, makes all the difference. But it would take us far afield to address this response." There is no need to try to solve everything.

Second, the stance taken doesn't even make sense to me. The article now says that, since the universe is a specified run, then it's not a fallacy to infer multiple universes. But the fact that the universe is a specified run supports the claim that the fallacy is committed, it doesn't undermine it.

>From the article: "The multiple universe hypothesis makes it more likely that life-permitting constants turn up in some universe or another. But it does not affect the probability that they turn up here in our universe (on this specified 'run'); that probability remains as low as it ever was."

A general, non-specified existence claim is confirmed. But the non-general, specified existence claim is not confirmed. Arguing that life-permission is just such a specified existence claim therefore undermines the inference to many universes.

DrRetard

God Related
I find the topic interesting, although somehow I find the discussion (both in the article and here on the talk page) difficult to follow. I studied probability and statistics in high school, and I know how to do simple calculations about lottery tickets and whether I'm safer in a car or an airplane.

Is this topic related somehow to the likelihood that God exists or not? --Ed Poor

 * No. My understanding of this article is this: there is a commonly-used argument that goes roughly "it's highly improbable that life came to be in the universe -- surely then, something must have put it in motion." This is fallacious reasoning. That does not mean god does not exist, or that god does exist -- it merely says that one argument is not valid. -- Tarquin

 * The original article as I understood it implied that said argument was valid. When you read it for the first time (a few hours ago) I had probably already rewritten its end and turned its conclusion upside down. Actually, I've had the impression that the whole original article just aimed at introducing and justifying that argument; hence the thing looses cohesion if the conclusion is reversed. But I'm quite sensitive on the invalidity of that argument, so my reading may be biased. -- FvdP 17:39 Oct 8, 2002 (UTC)
 * (but see below) -- FvdP 18:32 Oct 8, 2002 (UTC)

Overlap
There are two different arguments that can be said to fall under "inverse gambler's fallacy":
 * 1) a "proof" that multiple universes exist
 * 2) a counterargument to the following theist argument that God exists: "it's highly improbable that life came to be in the universe -- surely then, something must have put it in motion."

These things are quite different. The fallacy may or may not apply to 1 (multiple universes), it probably does, I'm not definitely sure. What I (FvdP) and (I thought) Hacking are after is its application to 2 (God's existence), and there I stand that the inverse gambler's fallacy clearly does not apply. My guess is that the misunderstaning between us (FvdP & DrRetard) is mainly a misunderstanding about whether the article's arguments address point 1 (multiple universes) or point 2 (God's existence).

Now point by point:
 * First, I don't think we need to be taking stances on whether inferences to [multiple worlds or God's existence] do or do not commit the inverse gambler's fallacy ? Yes we should, because by presenting Hacking's argument, the article is taking stance anyway.

 * Second, the stance taken doesn't even make sense to me. The article now says that, since the universe is a specified run, then it's not a fallacy to infer multiple universes. But the fact that the universe is a specified run supports the claim that the fallacy is committed, it doesn't undermine it.  I agree with you that applied to the multiple universes hypothesis, my stance does not make sense. But as explained above, it was really about God's existence (in my intent at least).

Actually, I must confess (after a few readings of the article) that I don't understand Hacking's point. Would he be actually fighting on 1 (against multiple worlds) rather than 2 (for the "fine-tuning" pro-God argument) ? (Or is he by chance equating the two questions ?)

My point is really about this: "and if there are, then life-permitting constants had to come up somewhere or another, why not here?. To which Hacking somehow answers "why would they appear here ?". I say "why here ? But simply because we are here ! the choice of our universe, because it's by definition the choice of a universe where life exists, is biased towards finding fine-tuned universe parameters (regardless of the existence of a designer)". It's like stopping on the next dice run that issues a 6-6. That surely increases the probability of someone seing a 6-6.

Probability arguments for or against God's existence lead us in muddy waters anyway ;-)

FvdP 18:32 Oct 8, 2002 (UTC)

--

First, the point of the original article: Hey, there's this fallacy. We have a tendency to commit this fallacy. We have an even stronger tendency in certain contexts. There's a popular response to an argument for theism, and this response might commit the fallacy.

 * I'll answer by inserting indented comments as they'll be (mostly) short. FvdP 20:36 Oct 11, 2002 (UTC).

Second, my personal convictions: there is no God, and the fine-tuning argument is pure codswallop. I still find the issues interesting, though.

 * Same here (but you know that already). FvdP

Third, some specific responses.

No. My understanding of this article is this: there is a commonly-used argument that goes roughly "it's highly improbable that life came to be in the universe -- surely then, something'' must have put it in motion." This is fallacious reasoning. That does not mean god does not exist, or that god does exist -- it merely says that one argument is not valid.''

The original article doesn't address such an argument. Rather, the article addresses a popular response to the fine-tuning argument for theism. Here's the response: "The obtaining of such wildly improbable life-permitting cosmological constants is good evidence that there are many other universes; and this explanation is at least as good as the God-explanation." The article doesn't say whether this response is good or bad. It says that the response might commit the fallacy, and that there's a debate about whether it does.

The original article as I understood it implied that said argument was valid"

The original article says nothing about the validity, soundness, or persuasiveness of the fine-tuning argument itself. Rather, it addresses, without deciding, a popular response to the argument. In any case, I'd never say that the fine-tuning argument is any good; I think it's codswallop.

"There are two different arguments that can be said to fall under "inverse gambler's fallacy":
 * 1) a "proof" that multiple universes exist
 * 2) a counterargument to the following theist argument that God exists: "it's highly improbable that life came to be in the universe -- surely then, something must have put it in motion."

These things are quite different. The fallacy may or may not apply to 1 (multiple universes), it probably does, I'm not definitely sure. What I (FvdP) and (I thought) Hacking are after is its application to 2 (God's existence), and there I stand that the inverse gambler's fallacy clearly does not apply. My guess is that the misunderstaning between us (FvdP & DrRetard) is mainly a misunderstanding about whether the article's arguments address point 1 (multiple universes) or point 2 (God's existence)."

Hacking thinks that the "oscillating universe" version of the popular "multiple universe" response commits the fallacy. White and Dowe think that all versions of the popular response commit the fallacy. Nobody, so far as I know, think that the fine-tuning argument commits the fallacy. I mean, sure, there's a hell of a lot wrong with the fine-tuning argument, in my opinion. But it doesn't fallaciously infer from an improbable result that there are or have been many trials of a similar nature. And that fallacious inference, after all, is the inverse gambler's fallacy.

 * OK. FvdP

*First, I don't think we need to be taking stances on whether inferences to [multiple worlds or God's existence] do or do not commit the inverse gambler's fallacy'' ? Yes we should, because by presenting Hacking's argument, the article is taking stance anyway.''

This is just bizarre. In any philosophy article, you have to present arguments. The key is to try to give the arguments a fair shake, even if you disagree with them; and you have to try to give popular criticisms a fair shake, even if you think the argument is good and the criticisms lousy. None of this is 'taking a stance', the way that, say, an Everything2 article might do. When an issue is controversial, with bright people on both sides, then try not to take a stance. Simple enough, I would think.

 * Simple enough ? Simple enough if we agree on words, and on the fact that the question is indeed disputable. About words, please take into account the fact that I'm not a native english speaker. By "the article is taking stance" I meant "the article takes position in favour of Hacking's argument that (some) proof a the multiple worlds hypothesis commits the i.v.f.". And this because (1) Hacking is taking stance this way; (2) the article seems to take Hacking's argument as granted and does not even present the contradictory view ("the argument to the multiple worlds does not commit the inverse gambler's fallacy"); (3) hence the article is taking stance.
 * I believe that if the answer is obvious and undisputed, even a philosophy article should take stance. (This has more to do with NPOV than with philosophy, actually). My error was believing that the answer was fairly obviously opposite to Hacking's (I no longer think so), so that we should take stance accordingly (even while at the same time presenting Hacking's argument).
 * And finally, no need to patronize me with "Simple enough", thanks. Don't forget that in this dispute too, there are relatively bright people on both sides, even though I might be dense at times. FvdP

''Actually, I must confess (after a few readings of the article) that I don't understand Hacking's point. Would he be actually fighting on 1 (against multiple worlds) rather than 2 (for the "fine-tuning" pro-God argument) ? (Or is he by chance equating the two questions ?)''

Hacking thinks that someone who looks at the (alleged) improbability of life-permitting constants and thence infers the existence of many previous oscillating universes is committing the inverse gambler's fallacy. Just because the improbable result would show up on some run doesn't mean it would show up on this run. So it's improper to infer multiple runs.

My point is really about this: "and if there are, then life-permitting constants had to come up somewhere or another, why not here?''. To which Hacking somehow answers "why would they appear here ?". I say "why here ? But simply because we are here ! the choice of our universe, because it's by definition the choice of a universe where life exists, is biased towards finding fine-tuned universe parameters (regardless of the existence of a designer)". It's like stopping on the next dice run that issues a 6-6. That surely increases the probability of someone seing a 6-6.''

But no one disagrees with this. If there are many universes, then there's nothing surprising about us living in a universe with the improbable bundle of life-permitting constants. The question is whether we can infer that there are indeed many universes, from the observation that we live in such a universe. Just because a hypothesis, if known true, would render an improbable result unsurprising doesn't make it OK to infer the hypothesis from the observation of the improbable result.

 * I have no problem with that argument expressed in that way.

 * Could you also please identify yourself ? You did not sign, you were not logged-in, so all I know is your IP address. A nickname would be better (e.g. are you DrRetard or not ?) This would give a better sense of continuity in the discussion, in case you already participated or will participate more.
 * FvdP 20:36 Oct 11, 2002 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, it logged me out and I was in a hurry to be done with the post! I apologize for any patronizing tone. And if my original article caused all this confusion, then it probably does need some rewriting! For one thing, I'll try to present the response to Hacking, et al. in greater detail than before. --DrRetard

Weak Anthropic
As I understand it, the many-worlds theory and inverse gambler's fallacy do not apply to the Weak Anthropic Principle (if that's what you are referring to with the fine-tuning argument). Instead, what it says is the probability of a universe favorable to intelligent life, conditional on the probability that intelligent life exists, is high.

How likely is it that you would have been born? Your parents might not have met, one of them might have died, a different spermatozoon might have fertilized your progenitor egg cell. You could commit the inverse gambler's fallacy and say that you were very lucky to be born. But nobody could claim that they were unlucky to not be born -- because people that were not born don't exist! Everyone who exists is "lucky"; but when we only sample from the "lucky" population, we should not be surprised to find out that everyone got lucky.

From the article:
 * today's best cosmologies allow for the possibility that there are many universes besides ours; and if there are, then life-permitting constants had to come up somewhere or another, why not here?

But it's not here in particular -- if we think we are special, then we have committed a fallacy. All the living universes (that may or may not exist) may be surprised that they are alive; none of the dead universes (that may or may not exist) will notice that they are dead.

I hope I made sense. --hb

ps. similar argument in quantum suicide. --hb

Not Many Worlds
I don't see the gambler's fallacy as a counterargument to the many worlds theory. A better analogy would be to think of yourself as the $50 bill in the machine. You don't know how many times the machine has been run, but you know the number 17 has come up at least once, since you have been spit out of the machine. From your perspective, there are three possibilities:
 * 1) The machine has been run only once, and the one player got lucky.
 * 2) The programmer rigged the machine so 17 would come up every time.
 * 3) The machine has been run many times.

Which seems more likely?

--erall

"dice have no memories"
Should it not be "dice have no memory"?

Gah...

I really don't know.

Acegikmo1 05:14, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Google suggests both are used, but "dice have no memory" is more popular. That's also the version I would prefer. Memories are what you remember, a memory is what you remember with (or in, if you prefer). Multiple "memories" in the last sense are weird. 82.92.119.11 23:33, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Cosmogony
If this is all about a many worlds/creationism debate, it should say so in the intro. Alternatively, having followed the link from gambler's fallacy, I would have expected it to start with something like:
 * You see a pair of fair dice rolled once, and the result is double-sixes. This is a quite improbable result, so you conclude that the dice were probably fixed to always roll six.

That seems a more natural reaction (and inverse) than the rolled many times before position in the article as of now. Indeed, there are Bayesian arguments why you might be slightly more inclined to believe the dice have a bias than you were before the roll. --Henrygb 18:17, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Okay, don't know where to put this, but why the "scare quotes" around intelligent design (and, for that matter, fine-tuning and worlds) in the multiple-world hypothesis section? --Matt O'Connor

Similar reasoning
Here is an argument similar but not equivalent to the one the article discusses.

 * Someone brings you a pair of fair dice which he rolled, revealing a result of double-sixes. This is a quite improbable result, so you conclude that the person probably rolled the dice many times before choosing to show them to you.

Logic or fallacy? (The person makes no claim as to why he brought the dice to you, or whether or not it is his first result. The diffence is that the dice are not rolled in front of your eyes, so the person may in fact have only come running to you when he got an interesting result.)  -- Milo

 * You can't even claim that he rolled them :)
 * Anyway, if your observation was not conditional to the dice reading 12, then you cannot make any inferences about past rolls. If he has something to gain from rolling the sixes, then you have reason to suspect your observational status and the outcome are not independent, and can accuse him of cheating with some significant probability :)
 * --Andy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.77.207 (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Encyclopedic style
This article doesn't seem to be written in a style coherant to that of an encyclopedia in places. Would a cleanup be in order? 80.42.209.188 22:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree (and came looking here for others who might have thought that) and I have now tagged it. Specifically, the Socratic dialogue is not very encyclopedic, and even occasionally seems to stray into POV. — brighterorange  (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I replaced the tag with the rewrite one. It seems to read more like a textbook than an article, therfore it needs a complete rewrite.--Orthologist 21:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Multiple worlds hypotheses
I agree that this is an unnecesary section of the article but what should we do ? I think that we should create a link to it on a seperate page, because it is of only moderate relevance, not worrth mension on the article it's self. I would like to hear some opinions on this subject. --Bobnessownage

Mmm, there no longer seems to be any discussion of how this relates to a multiverse / world ensemble theory anywhere in Wikipedia that I could find.

The Multiverse idea isn't motivated by fallacious thinking - there's a key difference between this fallacy and the inference to a multiverse. The multiverse case is more like this:

 * Someone tells you that he's going to roll a dice a certain number of times (but he doesn't say how many) and if he rolls 6-6 at any point he'll stop and come show them to you. And indeed, he does come and show you a 6-6. So should you conclude that he rolled more than once?

Yes, probably. The point is that 6-6 is the only result you could possibly have seen. Likewise, an apparently fine-tuned universe is the only result you could possibly have seen if you exist to see anything at all.

If we were to select a random universe and look at it, and it turned out that it contained intelligent observers, that wouldn't indicate how many universes there are. But that's not what we're doing. Evercat 23:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Error in article
On a much more mundane level, is there not a fallacy in the John Leslie example. No doubt a statistician will correct me if I am wrong, but do we not need to use a Bernoulli distribution root(p)(1-p) where p=1/36 for the expected number of throws before a double six is obtained, giving an "at most" of about one in 20.8 not 1/36. I do not have access to the John Leslie article, so I don't know whether the error is in his article or in the editor's interpretation, but I suspect the former. Can anyone check? Shall I add a note that there is a mathematical error here, to avoid perpetuating the minor fallacy? Dbfirs (talk) 21:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure where you get 1/20.8. If you want the number of throws until the first success (inclusive), then that would be governed by the geometric distribution, but the expected value of that is simply 1/p = 36 here. What the article talks about is the probability that it took only one throw to get a double six, which is p = 1/36. Since there's the additional twist that what we see is not necessarily the first success but just some success, these values turn into lower and upper bounds, respectively. -- Coffee2theorems (talk) 21:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Lots of fallacies about the fallacy
The fallacy is utterly unrelated to the argument from design.

Philosopher number 1 is using a straw man. Philosopher number 2 has come to the wrong conclusion.

Both are incredibly wrong, because they have yet to consistently define a roll in the metaphor.

Thus they are engaging in the fallacy of equivocation. Does a roll represent the process caused by the big bang? Or does a roll indicate a sub-process pertaining to the big bang?

The other assumption that is being made is that fine-tuning is required for living creatures.

If you don't know what the dice look like or what causes them to roll or how often they roll, (the dice could be misshapen, labeled with negative numbers as well, and there may be one or a million), how can you possibly make any inferences about what the results would normally be?

You can't. Both philosophers should consider becoming lawyers.

Deepstratagem (talk) 13:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Not very much can be said, true, but something can be (taken from the external links of Fine-tuned universe). Might even be worth mentioning in the article as another attempt at saying something definite about the problem from a Bayesian viewpoint (or maybe not, it's unfortunately only a web page AFAIK - maybe as statisticians, as opposed to philosophers, the authors considered the subject as a mere curiosity). -- Coffee2theorems (talk) 22:41, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Bayes theorem in the lead
I haven't been able to download Hacking's original paper, but does he explicitly say that the inverse gambler's fallacy is a fallacy of a misinterpretation of Bayes theorem? Or, does he just say that it is a fallacy (not explicitly mentioning Bayes)? Right now I find the discussion in the lead, where Bayes theorem is invoked, to be confusing. It almost reads like there is a fundamental problem with Bayes theorem, when I think the point is that a misinterpretation is being applied to Bayes theorem. Can someone help on this? Thanks, Grandma (talk) 16:03, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Couple things: untangling the bloated 'real life examples' section and cleaning this talk page
First, the real life examples section has grown into a big, unfocused morass of example, criticism, counter-criticism(?), and further support for the idea. I don't think it's too controversial to suggest parsing things down a bit. Even just adding a 'criticism' section, to just pull that stuff out into its own area would make the article more understandably arranged. I would happily start on this myself, but I'll gladly defer the task to those wiser than I (which is probably most of you) or has alternative ideas on this. I'm on standby on that until/unless it stalls out or someone offers a decent reason not to or an alternative, which I will gladly discuss.

Secondly, the age of the comments on this talk page are insane. 2002 and likely before? Just like the article, this place could use some archiving, or at least a tidy up. Anyone want to tackle that? I'm guessing no, so, anyone care if I work on it? Let me know. I'll wait a while, and clearly this page will too...! Buddy23Lee (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Clarification of "dice had been rolled many times before" needed
For example, if one observes...double sixes, it is wrong to suppose that...the dice have been rolled many times before.

The text ought to explain the reasoning which would lead to such a supposition. It was unclear to me, and I cannot express it in the correct tone.

One might suppose that the dice had been rolled many times before because—why? Because the "bad luck had all been exhausted by previous rolls"? No, that's not it.

This seems to be the Gambler's fallacy redux, if an observer supposes that the double sixes have appeared because of the influence of past rolls. catsmoke (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Inverse gambler's fallacy


text:
Tomaree National Park

Tomaree is a national park located in New South Wales, Australia, 145 - 155 km northeast of Sydney in the Port Stephens local government area. It is located on the shores of the Tasman Sea, extending north from Fishermans Bay to Shoal Bay passing through Boat Harbour, One Mile, Nelson Bay and Fingal Bay.

Most entry points to the park are indicated by signs installed by the NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service which usually indicate any activities that may be prohibited within park boundaries. One can for a walk on the beach or do whale watching, and one can also come across koalas dozing in the trees.

Two prominent locations in the park are Point Stephens Light, a lighthouse built in 1862 and the Tomaree Head Fortifications, World War II gun emplacements on Tomaree Head which were built in 1941, the location of the No. 20 Radar Station RAAF.

This is the traditional land of the Aboriginal people of Worimi, and provides important resources such as food, medicine and shelter.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Tomaree National Park


text:
Dentition

Dentition pertains to the development of teeth and their arrangement in the mouth. In particular, it is the characteristic arrangement, kind, and number of teeth in a given species at a given age. That is, the number, type, and morpho-physiology (that is, the relationship between the shape and form of the tooth in question and its inferred function) of the teeth of an animal.

Animals whose teeth are all of the same type, such as most non-mammalian vertebrates, are said to have homodont dentition, whereas those whose teeth differ morphologically are said to have heterodont dentition. The dentition of animals with two successions of teeth (deciduous, permanent) is referred to as diphyodont, while the dentition of animals with only one set of teeth throughout life is monophyodont. The dentition of animals in which the teeth are continuously discarded and replaced throughout life is termed polyphyodont. The dentition of animals in which the teeth are set in sockets in the jawbones is termed thecodont.

Overview
The evolutionary origin of the vertebrate dentition remains contentious. Current theories suggest either an "outside-in" or "inside-out" evolutionary origin to teeth, with the dentition arising from odontodes on the skin surface moving into the mouth, or vice versa. Despite this debate, it is accepted that vertebrate teeth are homologous to the dermal denticles found on the skin of basal Gnathostomes (i.e. Chondrichtyans). Since the origin of teeth some 450 mya, the vertebrate dentition has diversified within the reptiles, amphibians, and fish: however most of these groups continue to possess a long row of pointed or sharp-sided, undifferentiated teeth (homodont) that are completely replaceable. The mammalian pattern is significantly different. The teeth in the upper and lower jaws in mammals have evolved a close-fitting relationship such that they operate together as a unit. "They 'occlude', that is, the chewing surfaces of the teeth are so constructed that the upper and lower teeth are able to fit precisely together, cutting, crushing, grinding or tearing the food caught between."

Mammals have up to four distinct types of teeth, though not all types are present in all mammals. These are the incisor (cutting), the canine, the premolar, and the molar (grinding). The incisors occupy the front of the tooth row in both upper and lower jaws. They are normally flat, chisel-shaped teeth that meet in an edge-to-edge bite. Their function is cutting, slicing, or gnawing food into manageable pieces that fit into the mouth for further chewing. The canines are immediately behind the incisors. In many mammals, the canines are pointed, tusk-shaped teeth, projecting beyond the level of the other teeth. In carnivores, they are primarily offensive weapons for bringing down prey. In other mammals such as some primates, they are used to split open hard-surfaced food. In humans, the canine teeth are the main components in occlusal function and articulation. The mandibular teeth function against the maxillary teeth in a particular movement that is harmonious to the shape of the occluding surfaces. This creates the incising and grinding functions. The teeth must mesh together the way gears mesh in a transmission. If the interdigitation of the opposing cusps and incisal edges are not directed properly the teeth will wear abnormally (attrition), break away irregular crystalline enamel structures from the surface (abrasion), or fracture larger pieces (abfraction). This is a three-dimensional movement of the mandible in relation to the maxilla. There are three points of guidance: the two posterior points provided by the temporomandibular joints and the anterior component provided by the incisors and canines. The incisors mostly control the vertical opening of the chewing cycle when the muscles of mastication move the jaw forwards and backwards (protrusion/retrusion). The canines come into function guiding the vertical movement when the chewing is side to side (lateral). The canines alone can cause the other teeth to separate at the extreme end of the cycle (cuspid guided function) or all the posterior teeth can continue to stay in contact (group function). The entire range of this movement is the envelope of mastacatory function. The initial movement inside this envelope is directed by the shape of the teeth in contact and the Glenoid Fossa/Condyle shape. The outer extremities of this envelope are limited by muscles, ligaments and the articular disc of the TMJ. Without the guidance of anterior incisors and canines, this envelope of function can be destructive to the remaining teeth resulting in periodontal trauma from occlusion seen as wear, fracture or tooth loosening and loss. The premolars and molars are at the back of the mouth. Depending on the particular mammal and its diet, these two kinds of teeth prepare pieces of food to be swallowed by grinding, shearing, or crushing. The specialised teeth—incisors, canines, premolars, and molars—are found in the same order in every mammal. In many mammals, the infants have a set of teeth that fall out and are replaced by adult teeth. These are called deciduous teeth, primary teeth, baby teeth or milk teeth. Animals that have two sets of teeth, one followed by the other, are said to be diphyodont. Normally the dental formula for milk teeth is the same as for adult teeth except that the molars are missing.

Dental formula
Because every mammal's teeth are specialised for different functions, many mammal groups have lost the teeth that are not needed in their adaptation. Tooth form has also undergone evolutionary modification as a result of natural selection for specialised feeding or other adaptations. Over time, different mammal groups have evolved distinct dental features, both in the number and type of teeth and in the shape and size of the chewing surface.

The number of teeth of each type is written as a dental formula for one side of the mouth, or quadrant, with the upper and lower teeth shown on separate rows. The number of teeth in a mouth is twice that listed, as there are two sides. In each set, incisors (I) are indicated first, canines (C) second, premolars (P) third, and finally molars (M), giving I:C:P:M. So for example, the formula 2.1.2.3 for upper teeth indicates 2 incisors, 1 canine, 2 premolars, and 3 molars on one side of the upper mouth. The deciduous dental formula is notated in lowercase lettering preceded by the letter d: for example: di:dc:dp.

An animal's dentition for either deciduous or permanent teeth can thus be expressed as a dental formula, written in the form of a fraction, which can be written as, or I.C.P.M / I.C.P.M. For example, the following formulae show the deciduous and usual permanent dentition of all catarrhine primates, including humans:

 * 1) Deciduous: $$(di^2\text{-}dc^1\text{-}dm^2) / (di_2\text{-}dc_1\text{-}dm_2) \times 2 =20.$$ This can also be written as . Superscript and subscript denote upper and lower jaw, i.e. do not indicate mathematical operations; the numbers are the count of the teeth of each type. The dashes (-) in the formula are likewise not mathematical operators, but spacers, meaning "to": for instance the human formula is meaning that people may have 2 or 3 molars on each side of each jaw. 'd' denotes deciduous teeth (i.e. milk or baby teeth); lower case also indicates temporary teeth. Another annotation is, if the fact that it pertains to deciduous teeth is clearly stated, per examples found in some texts such as The Cambridge Dictionary of Human Biology and Evolution.
 * 2) Permanent: $$(I^2\text{-}C^1\text{-}P^2\text{-}M^3) / (I_2\text{-}C_1\text{-}P_2\text{-}M_3) \times 2 =32.$$ This can also be written as . When the upper and lower dental formulae are the same, some texts write the formula without a fraction (in this case, 2.1.2.3), on the implicit assumption that the reader will realise it must apply to both upper and lower quadrants. This is seen, for example, throughout The Cambridge Dictionary of Human Biology and Evolution.

The greatest number of teeth in any known placental land mammal was 48, with a formula of. However, no living placental mammal has this number. In extant placental mammals, the maximum dental formula is for pigs. Mammalian tooth counts are usually identical in the upper and lower jaws, but not always. For example, the aye-aye has a formula of, demonstrating the need for both upper and lower quadrant counts.

Tooth naming discrepancies
Teeth are numbered starting at 1 in each group. Thus the human teeth are I1, I2, C1, P3, P4, M1, M2, and M3. (See next paragraph for premolar naming etymology.) In humans, the third molar is known as the wisdom tooth, whether or not it has erupted.

Regarding premolars, there is disagreement regarding whether the third type of deciduous tooth is a premolar (the general consensus among mammalogists) or a molar (commonly held among human anatomists). There is thus some discrepancy between nomenclature in zoology and in dentistry. This is because the terms of human dentistry, which have generally prevailed over time, have not included mammalian dental evolutionary theory. There were originally four premolars in each quadrant of early mammalian jaws. However, all living primates have lost at least the first premolar. "Hence most of the prosimians and platyrrhines have three premolars. Some genera have also lost more than one. A second premolar has been lost in all catarrhines. The remaining permanent premolars are then properly identified as P2, P3 and P4 or P3 and P4; however, traditional dentistry refers to them as P1 and P2".

Dental eruption sequence
The order in which teeth emerge through the gums is known as the dental eruption sequence. Rapidly developing anthropoid primates such as macaques, chimpanzees, and australopithecines have an eruption sequence of M1 I1 I2 M2 P3 P4 C M3, whereas anatomically modern humans have the sequence M1 I1 I2 C P3 P4 M2 M3. The later that tooth emergence begins, the earlier the anterior teeth (I1–P4) appear in the sequence.

Dentition use in archaeology
Dentition, or the study of teeth, is an important area of study for archaeologists, especially those specializing in the study of older remains. Dentition affords many advantages over studying the rest of the skeleton itself (osteometry). The structure and arrangement of teeth is constant and, although it is inherited, does not undergo extensive change during environmental change, dietary specializations, or alterations in use patterns. The rest of the skeleton is much more likely to exhibit change because of adaptation. Teeth also preserve better than bone, and so the sample of teeth available to archaeologists is much more extensive and therefore more representative.

Dentition is particularly useful in tracking ancient populations' movements, because there are differences in the shapes of incisors, the number of grooves on molars, presence/absence of wisdom teeth, and extra cusps on particular teeth. These differences can not only be associated with different populations across space, but also change over time so that the study of the characteristics of teeth could say which population one is dealing with, and at what point in that population's history they are.

Dinosaurs
A dinosaur's dentition included all the teeth in its jawbones, which consist of the dentary, maxillary, and in some cases the premaxillary bones. The maxilla is the main bone of the upper jaw. The premaxilla is a smaller bone forming the anterior of the animal's upper jaw. The dentary is the main bone that forms the lower jaw (mandible). The predentary is a smaller bone that forms the anterior end of the lower jaw in ornithischian dinosaurs; it is always edentulous and supported a horny beak.

Unlike modern lizards, dinosaur teeth grew individually in the sockets of the jawbones, which are known as the dental alveoli. This thecodont dentition is also present in crocodilians and mammals, but is not found among the non-archosaur reptiles, which instead have acrodont or pleurodont dentition. Teeth that were lost were replaced by teeth below the roots in each tooth socket. Occlusion refers to the closing of the dinosaur's mouth, where the teeth from the upper and lower parts of the jaw meet. If the occlusion causes teeth from the maxillary or premaxillary bones to cover the teeth of the dentary and predentary, the dinosaur is said to have an overbite, the most common condition in this group. The opposite condition is considered to be an underbite, which is rare in theropod dinosaurs.

The majority of dinosaurs had teeth that were similarly shaped throughout their jaws but varied in size. Dinosaur tooth shapes included cylindrical, peg-like, teardrop-shaped, leaf-like, diamond-shaped and blade-like. A dinosaur that has a variety of tooth shapes is said to have heterodont dentition. An example of this are dinosaurs of the group Heterodontosauridae and the enigmatic early dinosaur, Eoraptor. While most dinosaurs had a single row of teeth on each side of their jaws, others had dental batteries where teeth in the cheek region were fused together to form compound teeth. Individually these teeth were not suitable for grinding food, but when joined together with other teeth they would form a large surface area for the mechanical digestion of tough plant materials. This type of dental strategy is observed in ornithopod and ceratopsian dinosaurs as well as the duck-billed hadrosaurs, which had more than one hundred teeth in each dental battery. The teeth of carnivorous dinosaurs, called ziphodont, were typically blade-like or cone-shaped, curved, with serrated edges. This dentition was adapted for grasping and cutting through flesh. In some cases, as observed in the railroad-spike-sized teeth of Tyrannosaurus rex, the teeth were designed to puncture and crush bone. Some dinosaurs had procumbent teeth, which projected forward in the mouth.

Dentition discussions in other articles
Some articles have helpful discussions on dentition, which will be listed as identified.
 * African bush elephant
 * Canidae
 * Red fox
 * Lemur
 * Manatee
 * Ungulate

title: Dentition


text:
Tooloom National Park

The Tooloom National Park is a protected national park located in the Northern Rivers region of New South Wales, Australia. The 4380 ha part is situated approximately 616 km north of Sydney and 20 km from the border town of.

The park is part of the Focal Peak Group World Heritage Site Gondwana Rainforests of Australia inscribed in 1986 and added to the Australian National Heritage List in 2007.

The name Tooloom is derived from Bundjalung word Duluhm meaning headlice, referring to the Tooloom Falls.

The average summer temperature in the park ranges from 16 °C and 28 °C, and the winter temperature ranges from 3.5 °C and 18 °C.

Fauna
The endangered species of long-nosed potoroo lives in the park, and there are also ten species of wallabies and kangaroos.

title: Tooloom National Park


text:
Toonumbar National Park

The Toonumbar National Park is a protected national park located in the Northern Rivers region of New South Wales, Australia. The 14910 ha park is situated approximately 620 km north of Sydney, near the town of.

The park is part of the Focal Peak Group World Heritage Site Gondwana Rainforests of Australia inscribed in 1986 and added to the Australian National Heritage List in 2007.

Description
The park features subtropical rainforests protecting threatened plants and animals, such as the sooty owl, red-legged pademelon and yellow-bellied glider. The rainforests on Dome Mountain and the Murray Scrub are part of the World Heritage listed Gondwana Rainforests of Australia. The rugged landscape of Mount Lindesay, Dome Mountain and Edinburgh Castle have provided the inspiration for many local Aboriginal legends.

The Murray Scrub and the Dome Mountain Forest contain significant areas of subtropical and temperate rainforest and are listed as part of the World Heritage Gondwana Rainforests of Australia. There are also drier and cooler places in the park and this has resulted in incredible diversity of flora, from eucalypt woodlands and tall gum forests, to forests of bangalow palms.

Animals in the park include marbled frogmouth, koala, Albert lyrebird and rainforest reptiles and frogs. The rainforest area is an important refuge for a number of fruit-eating pigeons and insectivorous bats. Pademelons also live there.

Focal Peak Volcano situated in Mt Barney National Park was active 23 million years ago and was responsible for the eroded volcanic remains of Mount Lindesay, Dome Mountain and Edinburgh Castle that dominate the landscape today. The high rainfall combined with fertile soil have created lush rainforests.

On average, the park receives 1035.8 mm of rain each year. Its highest recorded rainfall was 449.4 mm in one day.

Native title claim
Toonumbar National Park was part of the successful Githabul Nation native title claim. The Native title claimant Trevor Close an Aboriginal lawyer fought the NSW Government fifteen years probono to win the historic Native Title claim in memory of his grandfather Rory Close and his children Nea Close, Marnie Close Sera Close, Issiah Close and Tomika Close, Yartha Close and Kory Close. Trevor Close Githabul Tribal name is Mudargun which means lawman.

Inside Toonumbar National Park there are a number of jurabihls (increase sites) which were recorded with the assistance of the late Auntie Millie Boyd in 1974 by Howard Creamer. These types of sites (involving a complex set of religious and ritualistic beliefs) are of National significance due to their rarity in Australia and the rest of the world. Dome Mountain is the Githabul sacred site for the rain ceremony. Edinburgh Castle is the Goanna site and owned by the Clara Williams descendants who reside at the Aboriginal Reservation Muli Muli, which is 10 km (6 mi) west of the town of Woodenbong.

title: Toonumbar National Park


text:
Towarri National Park

Towarri is a national park located in New South Wales, Australia, 230 km north of Sydney.

Towarri is a diverse landscape with a variety of plant vegetation, it is also a habitat for many birds among others and the endangered speckled warbler.

The average elevation of the terrain is 502 metres.

title: Towarri National Park


text:
Ulidarra National Park

Ulidarra is a national park in New South Wales, Australia, 442 km northeast of Sydney.

The Ulidarra National Park comprises huge forests. Picturesque rain forests and ancient eucalyptus trees adorn the park. These forests sustain a variety of bird life. Other recreational facilities in the park include majestic coastal views, trails for four-wheel drives, tracks for biking and walking. The minimum elevation of the terrain is 4m, and the maximum elevation is 585m.

The Park has a rich wildlife. Among the more popular inhabitants are the koalas, masked owls, wompoo fruit doves, dingo es and little bent-wing bats. This makes the Ulidarra National Park a great destination for wildlife and bird enthusiasts.

title: Ulidarra National Park


text:
Wadbilliga National Park

Wadbilliga National Park is a 985.3 km2 national park that is in high country spanning the Monaro and South Coast regions of south-eastern New South Wales, Australia.

Location and features
Wadbilliga National Park is located 425 km southwest of Sydney via Cobargo, and 150 km south east of Canberra. The nearest towns are Narooma and Cobargo in the east, and Cooma on the plateau in the west.

Wadbilliga is a wilderness area, and much of its protected area is in a near pristine state. Featuring rugged gorges and gullies. Suited to overnight camping and wilderness walking (only for the most experienced and well prepared). Areas of interest include the Tuross Falls, the Tuross River Gorge and Brogo Wilderness Area. The Wadbilliga Track is a scenic four wheel drive road which travels up the escarpment from east to west.

Wadbilliga is in a remote part of Australia, and has had little influence from mankind in the history of European settlement. In recent decades, it has become protected, and has intentionally been left in a natural state.

The average summer temperature is between 8 °C and 23 °C, and the winter temperature is -3 °C and 10 °C. The minimum elevation of the terrain is 15 m, and the maximum elevation is 1335 m.

Flora
The undulating plateaux and steep gullies provide a variety of different habitats. Pinkwood rainforests occur in the sheltered fire free gullies. Black Ash, Monkey Gum, Messmate, White Ash and Snow Gums occur at higher altitudes. Yellow Box, Manna Gum and Forest Red Gum forests are found at lower altitudes. Other habitats include bogs, dry exposed eucalyptus woodland, riverside forest, swamps and heaths. Rare plants occurring in Wadbilliga National Park include the Deua Gum and the small shrub, Kunzea badjaensis.

Fauna
The bird and animal life is relatively undisturbed in this area. Over 122 native species of birds have been recorded here. Common animals include wombats, kangaroos, wallabies, possums of various types, platypus, echidna and many more.

title: Wadbilliga National Park


text:
Wallaga Lake National Park

Wallaga Lake National Park is a former national park in New South Wales, 296 km south-west of Sydney and north of Bermagui. It now forms part of a greater Gulaga National Park.

In 2001, as part of the Southern Comprehensive Regional Forest Agreement and at the request of Yuin people, Gulaga National Park was created out of the existing Wallaga Lake National Park, Goura Nature Reserve, and Mt Dromedary Flora Reserve.

In May 2006, ownership to this former National Park, plus the rest of the Gulaga National Park, was restored to the area's traditional owners, in whom legal tenure was vested (in trust) as part of an agreement signed by then New South Wales Environment Minister Bob Debus and representatives for the Yuin people.

The name of the park derived from Wallaga Lake, which is of cultural significance as well as being a source of food for the Yuin people. The black duck, Umbarra, who lives here, is the totem of the Yuin-Monaro people.

title: Wallaga Lake National Park


text:
Wallingat National Park

Wallingat is a national park located in New South Wales, Australia, 211 km northeast of Sydney. The park has forest walks, a campsite on the banks of the Wallingat River and a viewpoint, the Whoota Whoota Lookout, with views of Wallis Lake and the coast. The roads are unsealed.

Wallabies and kangaroos can be found here, as well as 200 species of birds. The average elevation of the terrain is 44 m.

title: Wallingat National Park


text:
Warra National Park

Warra is a national park in New South Wales, Australia, 438 km north of Sydney.

The average elevation of the terrain is 3,773 ft.

title: Warra National Park


text:
Warrabah National Park

Warrabah is a national park in New South Wales, Australia, 371 km north of Sydney. It is situated west of Kingstown and east of Split Rock Dam.

The major feature of the park is the Namoi River which carves a 15 km gorge that drops 245 m. Activities in the park include canoeing, li-loing, rock climbing and bush walking. The average elevation of the terrain is 759 metres.

Over 120 bird species have been spotted here. Among others there are robins, rosellas and cockatoos to wedge-tailed eagles and wrens.

title: Warrabah National Park


text:
Warrumbungle National Park

Warrumbungle National Park is a heritage listed national park located in the Orana region of New South Wales, Australia. The national park is located approximately 550 km northwest of Sydney and contained within 23311 ha. The park attracts approximately 35,000 visitors per annum.

The national park is based on the geographical Warrumbungle Mountain Range, sometimes shortened to the Warrumbungles, and thus the park name is often heard in the plural. The park lies within the Pilliga Important Bird Area, so identified by BirdLife International because of its importance for a range of woodland bird species, many of which are threatened.

Warrumbungle National Park was added to the Australian National Heritage List in December 2006.

On 4 July 2016, the park was the first within Australia to be certified as a Dark Sky Park by the International Dark Sky Association.

Access
The nearest towns to the park are Baradine, Coonabarabran, Coonamble, Gilgandra, Gulargambone, and Tooraweenah. Access via Coonabarabran to the east is by 27 km of sealed road called the John Renshaw Parkway, built in 1966. Via Coonamble to the west, access is by a 57 km long road with some gravel.

The park is contained within three local government areas: Warrumbungle Shire to the east, Gilgandra Shire to the south and Coonamble Shire to the west.

Features
Located within the large area of temperate savanna grasslands the park incorporates the most spectacular part of the Warrumbungle mountains, a region of past volcanic activity with unusual lava formations. Some of the most well-known rock formations include Belougery Spire, Bluff Mountain, Mount Exmouth (tallest mountain in the park), The Breadknife, Split Rock, Fans Horizon and Crater Bluff.

There are many scenic bushwalks and both rock climbing and abseiling are popular. Though the park preserved habitat for koalas in the past, a massive 2013 fire decimated the koala population; none are thought to have survived.

Located immediately adjacent to the national park is the Siding Spring Observatory. The observatory, officially opened in 1965, was constructed on the boundary of the park partly because the park provided a light-free environment. This scientific facility consists of several internationally important telescopes and has considerable socio-economic importance to the local Coonabarabran community.

Facilities
There are four main campsites. All camping in the park is only permitted after obtaining a permit. There is a visitors centre for bookings and keys to a number of huts. The park also caters for large school groups. There are free electric barbecues available however firewood is not supplied or to be collected within park grounds.

History
A proposal to reserve the more scenic parts of the Warrumbungle Range as the Warrumbungle National Monument was first initiated by the National Parks and Primitive Areas Council in 1936. The area was first proclaimed as a reserve in 1953. In 1967 management of the park was signed over to the National Parks and Wildlife Service. The construction of a network of walking tracks done by hand was headed by the parks first ranger, Carl Dow. The park was added to the list of the National Heritage in December 2006, in recognition of the park's importance as an extensive and spectacular geomorphological site with bold volcanic landforms that are unrivalled anywhere else in Australia; for its unique values as a transition zone between the arid western and wetter coastal zones; and its significance as an important refugium in inland south-east Australia.

2013 bushfire
In January 2013 about 80% of the national park was destroyed in a conflagration (thought to have been started by lightning) that burned much of the area surrounding the park as well as destroying dozens of homes. The visitor centre and museum were wiped out, as well as railings and viewing platforms throughout the park. The park was closed after the fire, but has since reopened, although some parts remain closed.

In popular culture
The national park was used as a filming location for the video for singer David Bowie's 1983 single "Let's Dance", centring on The Breadknife.

The Japanese anime "Adventures of the Little Koala" takes place within the shadow of The Breadknife.

title: Warrumbungle National Park


text:
Washpool National Park

The Washpool National Park is a protected national park located in the New England region of New South Wales, Australia. The 58678 ha park is situated approximately 520 km north of Sydney, inland from. The park has two campgrounds and is managed by the NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service. It was established in 1983 to preserve the significant plant and animal populations found in the Washpool and Gibraltar Range forests. In 1999 the park was expanded to include areas that had previously been threatened with logging, which a court injunction put to a stop to in 1990.

The Park is part of the Washpool and Gibraltar Range area of the World Heritage Site Gondwana Rainforests of Australia inscribed in 1986 and added to the Australian National Heritage List in 2007.

This natural habitat is full of diversity of plants, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and birds.

The average elevation of the terrain is 704 metres. Average summer temperatures range between 14 °C and 26 °C, and winter temperatures between 2 °C and 15 °C.

title: Washpool National Park


text:
Watagans National Park

Watagans is a national park located in New South Wales, Australia, 99 km north of Sydney.

This park has some fine rainforest scenery.

title: Watagans National Park


text:
Weddin Mountains National Park

Weddin Mountains is a national park located in New South Wales, Australia, 291 km west of Sydney. It is a small, crescent-shaped range, with a high point some 750 m, running roughly north south with steep cliffs on the eastern side sloping more gradually down to the plain in the west. Weddin mountains is a small patch of remnant vegetation which escaped clearing due to its ruggedness. Many aircraft pass overhead on their way from Sydney to Adelaide, is part of the Lachlan Fold system and is Wiradjuri country.

Bushrangers
Ben Hall, who plundered the Forbes-Grenfell area in the 1850s used the Weddin Mountains as a refuge. He holed up in a cave on the north-west side of the park with his gang, which included Johnnie Gilbert and Frank Gardiner. It is rumoured Ben Hall buried a treasure here that has not yet been located.

Seaton's Farm
There is a walk around 'Seaton's Historic Farm', which is now part of the national park. Seatons Farm is how one man and his wife turned every bit of wire into something useful. Jim Seaton hand made 3 km/1.8 miles of kangaroo proof fence by hand, with posts of local saplings, which are rot and vermin proof. The property was occupied in the late 1920s and during the Depression it was set up as a farm. Times and the land were hard and the buildings represent this. The sheds have walls made from flattened corrugated iron so that it stretched further. One of the sheds is full of old wire, iron sheets, bottles, everything you can imagine. All the old machinery is still there, sitting where it was when the family sold the property to the Government in the 1980s. A unique place, showing how the less well off farmers did it in the early and mid 1900s.

Wildlife
There are 216 species of animals recorded in Weddin Mountains National Park, the vast majority of which are birds. The species list includes three types of wallaby, one of which is the endangered brush tailed rock wallaby. The species list also includes painted honeyeater, swift parrot, little lorikeet and turquoise parrot. Pest species seen in the park are cats, rabbits, foxes, goats and sheep.

The park is part of the South-west Slopes of NSW Important Bird Area (IBA), identified as such by BirdLife International because of its importance for the conservation of swift parrots and superb parrots.

Access and facilities
Weddin Mountains National Park is most often approached from Grenfell. Travelling west from Grenfell on the Mid Western Highway there are sign posts to Holy Camp and Ben Halls Cave. The Google Earth route from Grenfell guides drivers along Euladrie road which ends at a farm two kilometres from the park with farmland in between.

Ben Halls Cave
Near Seaton's Farm is Ben Halls camping and picnic area with well designed fireplace/barbecues, large enough to permit the use of camp ovens, your own barbecue or for an open fire as well as having its own BBQ plate. It is a short walk from here to Ben Halls Cave.

Holy Camp
Holy Camp is 19 km south-west of Grenfell, Coordinates -33.89786°N, 148.0029°W. The last 3.8 km are dirt road. It is one of the entrances to the park with a pit toilet, parking area, picnic tables and fireplaces. Camping is allowed. There is a small water tank filled from the toilet roof but don't rely on it. From here it is possible to walk to Eualdrie and Peregrine lookouts. There is much wildlife in and around the carpark including lace monitors and skinks by day and brushtail possums and owlet nightjars by night.

Walks

The Eualdrie walking trail leads from Holy Camp and is advertised as a 2.6 km 2.5 hour return trip passing through Peregrine Lookout which takes 1.5 hours return. This was tested as 30 minutes to Perrigrine lookout, 23 minutes more to the Cairn at the summit and 40 minutes return. Peregrine Lookout is south of the carpark and from there the path turns back on itself as it proceeds upwards so that the cairn at the summit is a little north of the carpark. The path appears to continue past the cairn at Euradrie Trig (height 750 m) and can be followed down to Ben Halls Cave.

Literature
This small range is mentioned in a surprising number of publications. Two of note are A West Country Ballad which refers to a bounty hunter who unsuccessfully tried to capture Gardiner in the Weddin mountains and Robbery Under Arms where Weddin mountains gets a mention as a hideout.

title: Weddin Mountains National Park


text:
Werrikimbe National Park

The Werrikimbe National Park is a protected national park located in the catchment zone of the Upper Hastings River in New South Wales, Australia. Gazetted in 1975, the 33309 ha park is situated approximately 486 km north of Sydney, 65 km north-west of, and 90 km east of Walcha on the eastern escarpment of the Great Dividing Range.

The park is part of the Hastings-Macleay group World Heritage Site Gondwana Rainforests of Australia inscribed in 1986 and added to the Australian National Heritage List in 2007.

Description
Werrikimbe Park is noted for a rich diversity of plants and animals, rainforest, extensive wilderness, scenic wild rivers and opportunities for outdoor recreation in a remote location. This national park contains an Aboriginal stone arrangement of two stone rings, bora rings, where initiation ceremonies were held.

Access and facilities
All access roads to the park have a gravel surface, winding and steep in places. These roads are unsuitable for caravans. Beyond the Mooraback Road there is a four-wheel drive (4WD) trail to Youdales Hut visitor area which is only accessible by a 4WD with low range, after obtaining a key for the locked gate from either the National Parks and Wildlife Service or Apsley Motors in Walcha. There are five visitor areas with basic facilities — three on the eastern side near the edge of the escarpment, and two on the west, on the plateau.

Camping sites are available at:
 * Brushy Mountain campground (20 sites) on the north-eastern edge of the park. Campsites are suitable for: car and trailer (though not caravan) next to campsite. Facilities: toilets, amenities block, picnic tables, wood barbecues
 * Mooraback campground (5 sites) at the north-western end of the park. Facilities: toilets, picnic tables, wood barbecues
 * Plateau Beech campground (5 sites), on the eastern side of the park. Campsites are suitable for: people who are happy to walk a short distance from car to tent. Facilities: Pit/composting toilets, amenities block, picnic tables, wood barbecues

The Bicentennial National Trail passes through the western edge of the Werrikimbe Wilderness along the headwaters of the Hastings River and onto the Kunderang Brook. Horses and vehicles are not permitted within the declared Wilderness.

History
The Mooraback area was one of the earliest settlements along the "Falls Country" to the east of Walcha, with records showing the first settlers grazed blocks at Mooraback in the 1850s. The names of some of these settlers are reflected in the names featured in the park: Bishops Swamp, Cleghorns Creek and Careys Trail.

During the 1950s some manganese mining was carried out in what is now within the park confines.

Flora and fauna
There is a great variety of vegetation here, depending on rainfall and altitude: eucalypt woodlands, coachwoods, southern sassafras, stinging trees, long-leaf waxflowers and yellow carabeens with their flying buttressed trunks. Werrikimbe is home to the rare plants such as Chiloglottis bird orchids, downy guinea flowers and fairy lanterns. These forests also contain the only examples of filmy king fern known to occur in northern New South Wales. The Antarctic beech forest, found at the end of the North Plateau Road, is estimated to be up to 1,000 years old and forms the largest compact southern beech forest in existence. The threatened parva subspecies of pygmy cypress pine occurs on the eastern edge of the Northern Tablelands in the park.

Werrikimbe is the habitat of at least 22 threatened animal species. The rare Hastings River mouse was considered to be extinct until rediscovered in the park in 1981; it frequents the heathlands and open forest areas near streams. The Australian brushturkey, koala, eastern whipbird, powerful owl, gliders, quolls and lyrebirds may be seen. The park has been identified as an Important Bird Area (IBA) by BirdLife International because it contains one of only five known populations of rufous scrub-birds. It also supports flame and pale-yellow robins, paradise riflebirds, green catbirds, regent bowerbirds and Australian logrunners.

title: Werrikimbe National Park


text:
Willandra National Park

The Willandra National Park is a protected national park that is located in the Far West region of New South Wales, in eastern Australia. The 19386 ha national park is situated approximately 580 km west of Sydney and comprises flat grassy plain bounded to the north by Willandra Creek, which is a tributary of the Lachlan River.

Location and regional context
The Willandra National Park was established in May 1972. It is relatively remote, being located about 150 km northwest of, and 64 km by road from. The surrounding district is used primarily for extensive grazing of sheep and cattle. Most roads in the area are unsealed and become slippery and unusable after only moderate rainfall. The climate is semi-arid, with very hot summers and cold winters. The park is situated on the northern edge of the Riverina Plain of the Murray Basin lowlands.

History
Aboriginal occupation of the area is thought to date back at least 15,000 years. Willandra Creek formed a rough boundary between the Wiradjuri people to the south and the Wongaibon people to the north.

Europeans first settled the area in the 1830s. Initially this settlement was low key pastoral activity and allowed the Aboriginal people to largely continue their traditional way of living. However, during the 1870s and early 1880s extensive programs of fencing, buildings and dam construction took place as the first phase of European permanent settlement occurred. In 1894 Willandra passed into the ownership of the London Bank of Melbourne, after the entrepreneurial empire of its previous owners, the Whittingham Brothers, collapsed in the 1890s depression. Under the management of Arthur and Frank Laird during the subsequent period, Willandra became a renowned sheep property, winning many prizes for the quality of its Merino flock.

In 1912 Willandra was sold to the Vickery Partnership and was struck by drought for a period of two years immediately afterward. By 1914 the size of the flock had dropped to 10,000 sheep with larger numbers of stock having been moved from the property as the dry progressed. The Company reached its peak as a stud property in the 1920s and 1930s. Shearing numbers reached 96,943 in 1931 for a total of 3,243 bales of wool and the property area expanded to 436000 acre. A new homestead (still standing and available for accommodation) was added in 1918, along with numerous other buildings over the years. The property boasted a tennis court, a croquet lawn and orchards and was, and remains, a remarkable oasis in a typically dry and dusty landscape.

Despite high wool prices in the 1950s, Willandra had begun its decline as a prominent pastoral property, which had been exacerbated by a prolonged drought after the Second World War. In 1960 the New Zealand and Australian Land Company bought Willandra and its area shrank to 178055 acre. However, prosperity returned for a time and the property had up to 22 staff.

In 1969 Dalgety plc purchased the property, but declined to renew the pastoral leases when they expired in 1971. With the expiration of the leases, the NSW Government resumed the Crown Land grants and gazetted Willandra National Park in 1972. Subsequently, the reserve has been managed by the NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service. A major restoration program in the late 1990s restored the buildings to their former glory and a number of them are available for public accommodation.

Heritage listings
Willandra National Park has a number of heritage-listed sites, including:
 * Willandra Homestead

Vegetation and wildlife
The park is very flat with few elevated features. For the most part it is grassland, with trees only along the watercourses and around the normally dry lakes and depressions. The low woodland is dominated by black box (Eucalyptus largiflorens) and River Cooba (Acacia stenophylla). Before European settlement saltbush, cotton bush and native grasses are likely to have been the main plant cover on the plains. However, over 100 years of grazing and some pasture improvement have modified this and the plant and animal communities do not represent the environments that existed prior to European settlement. Despite this, Willandra is important habitat for many native species, including the emu, the threatened Plains-wanderer, red and grey kangaroos, echidnas and a variety of reptiles, such as Gould's Sand Goanna and the Mulga Brown Snake.

title: Willandra National Park


text:
Willi Willi National Park

The Willi Willi National Park is a protected national park located on the North Coast region of New South Wales, Australia. Gazetted in 1996, the 29870 ha park is situated 325 km northeast of Sydney and 60 km west of.

The park is part of the Hastings-Macleay group World Heritage Site Gondwana Rainforests of Australia inscribed in 1986 and added to the Australian National Heritage List in 2007.

The park is quite noticeable from nearby as a tall escarpment to the north west. The park is between the Macleay River and Hastings River valleys and includes Kemps Pinnacle and Mount Banda Banda, both over 1100 m above sea level.

This is one of the most beautiful parks in New South Wales. Its diversity offers naturalists everything they need, there are protected species of plants, birds and animals, as well as a beautiful rainforest environment.

title: Willi Willi National Park


text:
Woko National Park

Woko is a national park in New South Wales, Australia, 243 km north of Sydney.

The Woko National Park is characterized by a steep and ragged landscape. There are vast areas of rainforest, arid places with rocky outcroppings and groves of eucalyptus. The Manning River flows through the park and its riverside locations are used by picnickers and hikers.

The average elevation of the terrain is 497 metres. The average summer temperature is between 16.8 °C and 25.9 °C, and the winter temperature is between 20.1 °C and 14.4 °C.

Wildlife
The Woko National Park is a habitat for several species of birds and animals. The forests, grasslands and rocky regions of the park are home to birds like the lyrebird and the wedge-tailed eagle. A number of threatened species of animals live here, including the brush-tailed rock-wallaby.

title: Woko National Park


text:
Wollemi National Park

The Wollemi National Park is a protected national park and wilderness area that is located in the Central West and Hunter region of New South Wales, in eastern Australia. The 501703 ha park, the second largest national park in New South Wales, contains the 361113 ha Wollemi Wildernessthe largest such wilderness area in Australia and is situated approximately 130 km northwest of Sydney.

The Wollemi National Park is one of the eight protected areas that, in 2000, was inscribed to form part of the UNESCO World Heritagelisted Greater Blue Mountains Area. The Wollemi National Park is the most northwesterly of the eight protected areas within the World Heritage Site. The national park forms part of the Great Dividing Range.

Due to the park's ruggedness, much of it is undiscovered by humans and the many canyons have yet to be explored. The only known living wild specimens of the Wollemi pine (Wollemia nobilis) were discovered in 1994. Special efforts were made to protect the trees when the 2019-20 Australian bushfires burned through the park.

The national park is bounded to the north by the Goulburn River National Park and the Bylong Valley Way; to the east by the Yengo National Park, the Parr State Conservation Area, and the Putty Road; to the south by the Blue Mountains National Park and the Bells Line of Road; to the southwest by the Wolgan Valley and the Gardens of Stone National Park; and to the west by open farmland that surround the towns of and  and the Capertee Valley.

Geology
The Wollemi National Park is located on the western edge of the Sydney Basin. It sits on four strata of sedimentary rock; the Narrabeen and Hawkesbury sandstone and shale, the Illawarra and Singleton Permian coal measures and the Wianamatta shales. The strata at this area of the Sydney Basin have an upwards tilt to the north-west. Throughout most of the park the Hawkesbury and Wianamatta series have been eroded away exposing the Narrabeen group.

The landscape of the park is dominated by deep valleys, canyons, cliffs and waterfalls, formed by the weathering of the sandstone and claystone the Narrabeen group consists of. The parts of the park that lie on the Narrabeen and Hawkesbury sandstones generally have shallow soil with low nutrient levels while areas that lie on the Wianamatta shale usually have deeper and more nutrient rich soils allowing for a greater diversity of plant life. The coal measures are visible beneath cliff lines along river valleys. This layer is generally rich in nutrients and weathers to form deep clay loams. Tertiary basalt is common in the north west of the park. Basaltic peaks include Mount Coriaday, Mount Monundilla and Mount Coricudgy, the highest peak in the northern Blue Mountains. In some locations the basalt in the core of extinct volcanoes has eroded faster than the surrounding sandstone.

The Wollemi National Park is key in maintaining the quality of many tributary rivers to the Hawkesbury River and Goulburn-Hunter River catchments. The national park incorporates rivers such as the Wolgan River, Colo River and Capertee River which arise from outside the park. The Colo River is regarded as the last unpolluted river in New South Wales because the majority of it flows through the Wollemi National Park.

Biology and ecology
Eucalypt dominated open forests comprise 90% of Wollemi National Park, with over 70 species of Eucalypt recorded. The remaining 10% of the National Park comprises rainforest, heath and grassland.

The variety of habitats within Wollemi National Park allow for large diversity in animals. 58 reptile species, 38 frog species, 235 bird species and 46 mammal species have been recorded in the park.

The only known living wild specimens of the Wollemi pine (Wollemia nobilis), a species thought to have become extinct approximately thirty million years ago, were discovered in three small stands within deep canyons in 1994. The location is kept secret to protect the groves from diseases and trampling.

Besides the Wollemi Mint Bush, the park contains populations of the rare Banksia conferta subsp. penicillata, only described in 1981. The Wollemi Stringybark is a newly discovered species of Eucalyptus tree.

Aboriginal sites
There are many aboriginal sites within the park including cave paintings, axe grinding grooves and rock carvings. In 2003 the discovery of Eagle's Reach cave was publicly announced. This site was found by bushwalkers in 1995 but remained unknown to the wider community until a team from the Australian Museum reached the cave in May 2003. The art within this small cave is estimated to be up to 4,000 years old and it consists of up to a dozen layers of imagery depicting a wide variety of motifs rendered in ochre and charcoal. The team who recorded this site counted over 200 separate images, mainly of animals and birds but also stencils of hands, axes and a boomerang.

It is a very significant site and the remote location is being kept secret for its own protection.

Activities
Ganguddy Campground is a campsite located on the Cudgegong River in the park. The local Wiradjuri Aboriginal people know the area as Ganguddy, the alternative name is Dunns Swamp. National Parks and Wildlife Service, New South Wales manages the location.
 * Bushwalking
 * Canyoning
 * Canoeing
 * Camping
 * Abseiling

Historical places

 * Wolgan Valley
 * Newnes
 * Newnes glow worm tunnel
 * Zig Zag Railway
 * Oil shale Mining
 * Glen Davis

Climate
The Wollemi area features an oceanic climate (Köppen climate classification Cfb) with mild to warm summers, cool to cold winters and generally steady precipitation year-round, though with a peak in the first few months of the year.

title: Wollemi National Park


text:
Wyrrabalong National Park

The Wyrrabalong National Park is a coastal national park that is located on the Central Coast of New South Wales, in eastern Australia. The 620 ha national park consists of two sections; the northern section consists of approximately 480 ha and covers a substantial area of the peninsula between The Entrance and Norah Head as well as  Terilbah and Pelican Islands within Tuggerah Lake. The southern section consists of about 120 ha of the coast, from Shelly Beach south to Forresters Beach. The park is also noted for containing the last significant coastal (littoral) rainforest on the Central Coast.

Most of the park lies in the Tuggerah Important Bird Area, identified as such by BirdLife International because of its importance for a variety of water and woodland birds.

The average elevation of the terrain is 8 metres.

History
The land now occupied by Wyrrabalong National Park was first inhabited by the indigenous Darkinjung and Awabakal peoples. The Darkinjung occupied the southern section and The Awabakal occupied the northern section. It is believed Europeans first discovered the Tuggerah Lakes in 1796. It was found by Governor of Tasmania, Colonel David Collins, who had arrived on the First Fleet, during the search for an escaped convict, Mary Morgan, who was said to be living with the Aborigines to the North of the Hawkesbury River.

Weather
The average summer temperature is between 20 °C and 25 °C, and the record measured temperature is 42.4 °C, in winter the temperature is between 10 °C and 17 °C, and the lowest measured temperature is 3.4 °C.

title: Wyrrabalong National Park


text:
Yabbra National Park

Yabbra is a national park in New South Wales, Australia, 598 km north of Sydney.

The average elevation of the terrain is 387 metres.

title: Yabbra National Park


text:
Yengo National Park

The Yengo National Park is a protected national park that is located in the Lower Hunter region of New South Wales, in eastern Australia. The 154328 ha park is situated 213 km northwest of Sydney, 40 km south of, 121 km northwest of , and 91 km southwest of. The average elevation of the terrain is 309 metres.

The Yengo National Park is one of the eight protected areas that, in 2000, was inscribed to form part of the UNESCO World Heritagelisted Greater Blue Mountains Area. The Yengo National Park is the most northeasterly of the eight protected areas within the World Heritage Site. The national park forms part of the Great Dividing Range.

Features
The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) opened their depot in Bucketty in 1993 and commenced managing the newly established Yengo National Park. A helipad, known as 'Bucketty International' was established and in 1995 a fire tower was built, following severe fires in the area. In 1999 the NPWS acquired parts of the Crown land that lay between Bucketty and the Yengo National Park. This new area also included the Convict Wall and the amphitheatre used by the community.

The Bucketty community asked NPWS to recognise their custodianship of the place and in early 2000, the community, together with the NPWS, developed a Memorandum of Understanding to jointly manage the site.

Access to Yengo National Park is via Yengo Creek Road off the Great North Road, near. The park is bounded in the east by the small settlements of Bucketty and ; in the north by Wollombi Brook; in the west by the Putty Road, the settlements of and, and the Mellong Range; and in the south by the Parr State Conservation Area, the settlement of , Webbs Creek, Mogo Creek, the Hawkesbury River, and the Dharug National Park.

The course of the Macdonald River flows from the northwest of the national park towards the southeast, where it reaches its confluence with the Hawkesbury River.

Bushfires of 2019/2020
In the summer of 2019/2020, Yengo National Park was engulfed in the largest bushfire from a single ignition point that Australia has known; this fire became known as the Gospers Mountain Fire. Nearly all the national park was burnt.

Wildlife
This is a place of great biodiversity. The park is home to over 50 species of mammals, such as wombats, wallaroos, koalas and gliding possums and over 200 species of birds.

title: Yengo National Park


text:
Yuraygir National Park

Yuraygir is a national park in New South Wales, Australia, located 482 km northeast of Sydney. It was created in 1980, a result of the merger and enlargement of two national parks, Angourie and Red Rock National Parks, both of which had been established in 1975. At the time of its establishment in 1980, the park was fragmented, and parcels of land were bought over the following two decades to unite segments into a more contiguous protected area. Sometimes these acquisitions required protracted negotiations (and legal disputes) with land owners.

Etymology
The name is a phonetic translation of the local indigenous tribe who had lived in the area, and had formerly been transcribed variously as Jeigir, Jiegera, Jungai, Yagir, Yegera, Yegir, Yiegera or Youngai.

Description
Covering 65 km of coastline, it is the largest coastal park in New South Wales. The Yuraygir coastal walk traverses the coastline, and takes four days to complete. There are 48 beaches, including the highly regarded 800 m-long Shelley Beach.

Thirty species of mammal have been recorded within the park, including the threatened rufous bettong (Aepyprymnus rufescens), tiger quoll (Dasyurus maculatus), brush-tailed phascogale (Phascogale tapoatafa) and squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis). Swamps and wet heath are habitat for the threatened eastern ground parrot (Pezoporus wallicus) and eastern grass owl (Tyto longimembris).

Pests include feral pigs, cats, dogs and horses, and foxes, while problem weeds include groundsel bush (Baccharis halimifolia), bitou bush (Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotunda), lantana (Lantana camara) and slash pine (Pinus elliottii).

title: Yuraygir National Park