Cats vs Dogs. GET IT ON!

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-06-09 04:50pm

Between the two...honestly it very easy to see why dogs are a superior animal. They have more social ability, and are far easier to train. That particular part is ignorant to say otherwise.

As for personal, I like small cats or a decent sized dog. When you have a dog that's smaller then a rat(Those mexican hairless creatures), I question why have a dog. The thing is nearly a waste of space, and is not cheap. Get at least a real small dog. Then again I say the same about a cat that basically hisses and snarls at you and you consider it cute.

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2006-06-09 05:37pm

I prefer dogs over cats. Period. I've got two cats and all they do is want to go outside then come home to whine for food, then sleep, and sleep, and sleep, and sleep, wake up and whine for food then at night want to go outside. But recently we do not let the cats outside at night because two things happen, A) they wander off and don't come back until the morning, B) and when they do that, they whine at 6 in the morning for us to let them in. Their whine is so annoying, so incessant that we received complaints from our neighbours. C)letting them outside during the night increases the risk of them encountering animals that could kill them. Unfortunately not letting them outside has posed other problems like the cats climbing on top of the kitchen counters and shedding hair all over the place and creating a mess.

I am so glad that soon I won't have to put up with those cats and instead will have a dog.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2006-06-09 06:08pm

MKSheppard wrote:Wrong. Dogs are capable of much more than just ten different sounds in regards to communications.

You ever wonder what that tail wagging or the way they cock their head, etc means? It's one reason why they adapted so well to us; because they can read our facial expressions very well.

Spot on Shep. Dogs have alot of body language communications and can learn our body language and some of our words. There are certain words that we spell out around ours, such as "walk". What is spooky is they only get excited when the context of the word involves them. If you said "I need to walk off that quesadilla", they don't assume it is about them.

Plus, dogs have highly readable body language themselves that a person can read, if you pay careful attention and know how to look. I generally have a good idea about what is going through my dogs noggins by their vocalizations, posture, ear position, eyes, and tail position. Even specific stuff, with my younger dog, who I can tell if he merely wants to go out or needs to legitimately go to the bathroom.

All that is, of course, anecdotal, but as far as I can tell, dogs are excellent communicators.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2006-06-09 06:17pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: Spot on Shep. Dogs have alot of body language communications and can learn our body language and some of our words. There are certain words that we spell out around ours, such as "walk". What is spooky is they only get excited when the context of the word involves them. If you said "I need to walk off that quesadilla", they don't assume it is about them.

Plus, dogs have highly readable body language themselves that a person can read, if you pay careful attention and know how to look. I generally have a good idea about what is going through my dogs noggins by their vocalizations, posture, ear position, eyes, and tail position. Even specific stuff, with my younger dog, who I can tell if he merely wants to go out or needs to legitimately go to the bathroom.

All that is, of course, anecdotal, but as far as I can tell, dogs are excellent communicators.

My dog can even spell. So if I say "I'm going for a W-A-L-K", my dog will prick his ears up and tilt his head to the side. If it's 2230, the time my mum usually takes him out for a final walk, he'll get out of bed, trundle downstairs and be ready, even if we've forgotten. He may be as dumb as a doorpost in many things, but for time keeping and communication, he's quite adept.

The cleanliness arguments are another point of contention. Dogs are filthy. There is no doubting that. I would actually be wary of having a dog with young children, not just down to the potential physical problems if it gets rough, but down to checking it hasn't brought some nasty bug in with it from the daily exploits that could harm the kids, and my microbiology prof. hated pets, but after seeing some zoonoses you could get from petting zoos, I cans see why. Cats are, on the surface, somewhat more sanitary (mine seems to just clean and sleep when she's not eating or kissing my arse), but consider cats still use their tongues - the same organ for cleaning and eating - as their own toilet paper.

Far as the two go evolutionarily speaking, they are both perfectly adapted creatures, the dog having an excellent symbiotic like relationship with Humanity and cats being the most efficient hunters for their size. What you end up with as a pet is entirely down to what you want in a pet, and right now, I can afford to have both. When I move into my own place, I'm going to copy Shep and get a ferret like I've always wanted. Living with cats and dogs all your life makes them a little dull, though I swear to have a Labrador in my own family when it comes to that stage and carry on the naming tradition of starting with an "M".

Alan Bolte · Post by **Alan Bolte** » 2006-06-09 06:54pm

Ferret? Ick.

Garfield is a cartoon, not a documentary. What kind of example is that? And of course we don't have large, domesticated cats, that's my point. Our ancestors didn't do that. They bred dogs for all sorts of things, but the cats were just bred for show or left largely to themselves. Comparing the usefulness and intelligence of a big dog to that of a cat just seems rediculous when there's plenty of small dogs to compare. Now, in terms of what makes the better pet, obviously if size isn't a factor we can compare the two.

I won't argue against the superior inherent loyaty or natural social tendencies of dogs, I'd just like to change the minds of cat haters.

Pick · Post by **Pick** » 2006-06-09 07:25pm

Why hate either? It all depends on the personality of the person in question. Additionally, that "cats are for irresponsible people" stuff is bullshit. With cats and dogs, you're getting a different package with different appeal. Honestly, if nothing else, I prefer the feel of cat fur and their scent as opposed to a dog's. That's enough for me to prefer them as a pet animal. I also don't think that reflects poorly on my ability to care for anything else.

Edit- though my idea of the perfect pet is a land-roaming octopus. So cool!

Duckie · Post by **Duckie** » 2006-06-09 07:25pm

I understand that dogs are more useful than cats, but I just love cats all the same. They're smaller, cuter (in my eyes at least), and less high-maintainance. You really, once they're socialized and grown, just have to feed and play with them to keep them happy. Dogs are so... needy. Sometimes that neediness is worth it, but often Dogs are just annoying, messy, disgusting, or all three. I've, in contrast, never met a cat I didn't like, excepting anti-social and violent ones you see in the streets or such.

As far as Cats not really being social animals, mine seems to have bonded to me well and I don't think she's exceptionally nice or anything. We picked her up from a store at about 6 weeks old. I played with her the most, pet her often, and gave her food the most often and she seems to have bonded quite well. At night if I go to bed or sit down she sleeps under a blanket on me, and if I ever even lay on my bed at any time where she can hear it- even noon or other crazy times- she'll instantly come running to get scratched and pet.

Of course, like many cats, she also is a bit pissed off at the world and generally indicates her desire to be picked up or pet is over by kicking me*, but the feistiness is cute from a small animal. They can't actually hurt you, and she's so small her claws are literally incapable of drawing blood as far as I can tell. Plus, I have the feeling she just forgets what's she's doing and scratches people while trying to be playful.

I can vouch for cats having like 100 seperate vocalizations, too. Mine has seperate noises for just different types of "Let Me In" (Ie- "It's Raining", "I'm Hungry", or "I'm Scared Of Some Loud Noise I Heard") or "I Don't Want To Be Picked Up", pretty much ranging from "Okay I'll Humor You" to "Put Me Down, Asshole". With the dog in the house, I'm pretty sure there's not as many, mostly for different things she sees out the window that she's barking at.

*For some reason I'm the only one who gets attacked. Probably because I play with her anyway when she does it instead of stopping and leaving like most normal people would. I guess I sort of reinforced the behavior...

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2006-06-09 07:36pm

Pick wrote:
Edit- though my idea of the perfect pet is a land-roaming octopus. So cool!

I want one, even cooler if it has three legs, then I shall name him Tripod. I'm thinking tentacle rape comes into this somewhere though.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2006-06-09 07:59pm

Regarding the cleanliness factor: it's true that many dogs smell bad and get dirty easily, however, if this is really a huge problem you can opt for certain breeds that will stay cleaner. My roommate's girlfriend has a Rhodesian Ridgeback/Yellow Lab and she is consistently as clean as any cat I've ever seen (and she was a stray dog, too).

I am continually baffled by the fact that cat-owners complain about dogs being dirty but don't seem to have a problem with the fact that cat ownership requires you to keep a box of shit in your home.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2006-06-09 08:18pm

And as for dogs being high-maintenance; bollocks, that's a generalization. It's true that some dogs require a great deal of maintenance, such as the English bulldog. But take the labrador, the most popular dog in the U.S - you have to make sure it has food and water, allow it to exercise a few times a week, let it go to the bathroom a few times a day, and take it to the vet once or twice a year. That's it. This is not a huge time investment.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-06-09 09:24pm

Chardok wrote:Utility/Loyalty

Cats: Effectively useless, incredibly selfish, loners by nature, except for the very young. Cats are only marginally domesticated and will attach to whatever entity is providing food for it at any particular time.

An absolute lie. My Cat is the total opposite. She is very social and wants to be around people almost all the time. She is also very selective. She has bonded with the three of us in the family and refuses to be friendly with anyone else, food or not.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-06-09 09:45pm

Joe wrote:And as for dogs being high-maintenance; bollocks, that's a generalization. It's true that some dogs require a great deal of maintenance, such as the English bulldog. But take the labrador, the most popular dog in the U.S - you have to make sure it has food and water, allow it to exercise a few times a week, let it go to the bathroom a few times a day, and take it to the vet once or twice a year. That's it. This is not a huge time investment.

According to some people, it is. As for the people citing various personal anecdotes to disprove the notion that cats are not pack animals the way dogs are, give it a rest. If every argument could be settled with unverifiable personal anecdotes, I'd believe in God. The fact is that dogs come from a long evolutionary line of pack animals, and cats come from a long evolutionary line of solitary hunters. People claiming that this distinction is a "lie" and proving this claim with nothing more than "well, my cat acts like this" had better come up with more compelling (not to mention verifiable) evidence than that.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-06-09 09:48pm

I'd have to say that in general, dogs are more maitenance intensive then cats. Though it also depends on the enviroment. Living on a 20 acre farm and having a cat door means that we can leave for a month and the cat is just fine while the dog needs someone to keep feeding it. But if we lived in an apartment, both animals would have the same maitenance. On the other hand, living on a 20 acre farm with a Border Collie is a lot easier then in an apartment. We don't have to constantly excercise the dog because she can run all over the place. We also don't have to worry about dealing with letting the dog out for a crap since she has 20 acres to use.

Camel · Post by **Camel** » 2006-06-09 10:40pm

I like both cats and dogs. I've had several dogs, two cats so far.

As I type this my cat is sitting on the computer desk with me. She is very affectionate. She has food and water at all times. So she isn't begging for food. She always wants to curl up in my lap and sleep on me. I remember when she was a kitten. She came to my bed in the middle of the night to sleep on me. Maybe she was cold and lonely on the floor? She still does that, but sometimes it's like: "Man, what do YOU want?"

Cats are easy to read if you know body language. Just like dogs. All animals communicate mostly with body language. Here is one:
The cat is staring at you with its eyes half closed. Then it slowly blinks it eyes and keeps them half closed. This is akin to a kiss or perhaps rubbing noses.

MRDOD wrote:Of course, like many cats, she also is a bit pissed off at the world and generally indicates her desire to be picked up or pet is over by kicking me*, but the feistiness is cute from a small animal. They can't actually hurt you, and she's so small her claws are literally incapable of drawing blood as far as I can tell. Plus, I have the feeling she just forgets what's she's doing and scratches people while trying to be playful.

Is your cat still a kitten or not mature? I can assure you those claws will become very dangerous in the future. You won't be able to play with her without getting some kind of injury.

I play a game with my cat occasionally. I tap her on the head and draw away really fast. Then she has to catch my hand before I draw it away. She cannot let me get away with that! So she stalks her "prey", and pounces only to have it disappear. If she gets you, she will grab you with her paws and kick with the rear ones and bite. Its not bad but I can assure you it does hurt. If she is winning I will have to get both hands out. One distracts her while the other tags her. She can't track two targets at once and she gets pissed off.

I don't especially like cats or dogs more. After this cat I may just get a fish or something.
Edit:
I forgot to address the original post. Cats are better than dogs. They are the current ultimate predator. I'm not just comparing house cats to labs. This includes Tigers and Wolves as well. Cats don't need to be social. It would only be a drain on their food supply anyway. Except for lions, but they have HERDS of wildebeests and zebras; and they are social creatures. They have plenty of food and its beneficial to be social.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-06-09 11:39pm

The fact that cats are better than dogs at certain things does not make them a better pet. Let's put it this way: if all dogs disappeared, humanity would suffer a greater loss than if all cats disappeared. Some people like cats, but nobody needs them.

Imperial Overlord · Post by **Imperial Overlord** » 2006-06-10 06:14am

Darth Wong wrote: As for the people citing various personal anecdotes to disprove the notion that cats are not pack animals the way dogs are, give it a rest.

Cats were solitary hunters, not pack hunters, before we started domesticating them and they have been domesticated for only a fraction of the dogs have been. One of the side effects of that has caused them to live in closer proximity to each other than they would in the wild. In a number urban areas feral house cats have formed colonies, some containing dozens of cats. They have demonstrated a variety of very social behavior, including nursing the kittens of other cats.

Science News

Lord Woodlouse · Post by **Lord Woodlouse** » 2006-06-10 06:44am

Camel wrote:
I don't especially like cats or dogs more. After this cat I may just get a fish or something.
Edit:
I forgot to address the original post. Cats are better than dogs. They are the current ultimate predator. I'm not just comparing house cats to labs. This includes Tigers and Wolves as well. Cats don't need to be social. It would only be a drain on their food supply anyway. Except for lions, but they have HERDS of wildebeests and zebras; and they are social creatures. They have plenty of food and its beneficial to be social.

Are they better hunters than a pack of wolves though? (wolves would be essentially the closest to a natural dog).

Dogs are naturally better suited to rural environments. They're not as agile as a cat, so man-made constructions tend to get in the way of them. In a natural environment they'd be (and are, if you're willing to accept wolves as dogs) quite formidable hunters.

Zero · Post by **Zero** » 2006-06-10 07:03am

I prefer dogs over cats for the same reason I prefer friends who actually hang out over friends who ignore me all the damned time. There's actually some aparent bond there, and the general feel that someone's got my back if the shit hits the fan. Of course, I've never owned a cat myself, but most of my friends have always been cat-owners, and I've just never seen a cat act in any way like it gave a fuck about any of them.

As for the loud and smelly thing... for most dogs, yeah, but like others have said, it can vary with the breed. Neither of my dogs are very smelly, and the older one's only loud when he senses some kind of intrusion into our home or backyard.

And about the needy thing... doesn't bug me. The only thing that boils down to an actual inconvenience as opposed to an extra 2 minutes in the morning before I'm off is cleaning up the dog crap. The walks and playfullness and whatnot are fun, to me. Everyone could use a bit of good exercise, and anyone who wants a pet to be like a toy in that they can pick it up and play with it when they want and leave it be and forget about it whenever do actually sound like irresponsible people, or at least the kind of people that I wouldn't particularly want to be friends with. "I'm kind of tired of hanging out with you, can you perhaps get the fuck out?" Doesn't appeal to me...

Camel · Post by **Camel** » 2006-06-10 07:23am

Lord Woodlouse wrote:Are they better hunters than a pack of wolves though? (wolves would be essentially the closest to a natural dog).

Of course, I am being fair. A lone wolf (never mind dogs) against a tiger is an unfair comparison. That would be playing to the cats strengths. The only truly fair comparison would be a pride of lions against a (huge) pack of wolves. Cats are capable of social behavior. Since the extinction of all lions, (except the African lions) there are few examples of cooperation in cats, besides the pathetic feral domestic cats.

One on one. One cat Vs. One dog(wolf). It's no contest. Cats are the ultimate predator. It would take three wolves to beat a tiger at the least(all subjective, my opinion).

Lord Woodlouse wrote:Dogs are naturally better suited to rural environments. They're not as agile as a cat, so man-made constructions tend to get in the way of them. In a natural environment they'd be (and are, if you're willing to accept wolves as dogs) quite formidable hunters.

When you say dog, I immediately assume you mean a pack of 20 wolves. As far as this discussion is concerned.
You are right, as far as the wolves complete dependence on remote habitats. Just look at the almost complete extinction of the wolf in north america. Cats on the other hand can covertly handle human bastardization of the land to a better extent.
In a fight between a pack of 20 elite wolves against a young puma; the cats loose. No contest. This is the extremely biased comparison. A Pride of 20 lions against the wolves is also unfair. Again, one on one, Cats are just the superior predator.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-06-10 08:44am

Camel wrote:One on one. One cat Vs. One dog(wolf). It's no contest. Cats are the ultimate predator. It would take three wolves to beat a tiger at the least(all subjective, my opinion).

Not relevant to dogs vs cats. If you want to talk about killing power, one German shepherd could easily kill pretty much any variety of domestic cat in a fight.

You are right, as far as the wolves complete dependence on remote habitats. Just look at the almost complete extinction of the wolf in north america. Cats on the other hand can covertly handle human bastardization of the land to a better extent.

Wolves are mostly extinct because they're dangerous to humans and human agriculture, not because they're inferior hunters. If anything, their superior collective hunting and killing ability is why humans have been exterminating them across this continent. It's not as if tigers would fare any better in North America if they were released into the wild. They'd be shot on sight too.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2006-06-10 09:04am

Cats, clearly.

I mean what other animal manages to get fed not for being useful, but because when you feed it, it looks pleased with you.

No fucker ever looked at a dog and thought "You know, I'm going to build a temple and start worshipping that!".

Lord Woodlouse · Post by **Lord Woodlouse** » 2006-06-10 09:07am

Wolves are much more dedicated hunters than most big cats. Wolves hunt their prey to exhaustion, while big cats make opportunistic sprints. In my own mind wolves are much more impressive hunters for that, even if a big cat is simply bigger and stronger.

Your average big cat is as much a different animal to a domestic cat as a domestic cat is to a dog, really.

Camel · Post by **Camel** » 2006-06-10 09:45am

Darth Wong wrote: If you want to talk about killing power, one German shepherd could easily kill pretty much any variety of domestic cat in a fight.

Common, be fair now.

At least have the courtesy to compare a similarly sized dog to a domestic cat. I would never compare a tiger to a Chihuahua!

Lord Woodlouse wrote:Wolves are much more dedicated hunters than most big cats. Wolves hunt their prey to exhaustion, while big cats make opportunistic sprints. In my own mind wolves are much more impressive hunters for that, even if a big cat is simply bigger and stronger.

I don't see how wolves are more impressive hunters with that line of thought. In a pride, cats are much more impressive hunters. If anything, wolves are just so inefficient that they can survive any difficulty (save humans murders) since they can only manage to take the weakest of prey. Cats are just too efficient and kill off the food supply. Practically all lions are extinct now.

Lord Woodlouse wrote:Your average big cat is as much a different animal to a domestic cat as a domestic cat is to a dog, really.

Yeah... Domestic cats don't kick any ass. German Shepards kick ass. I got it!

I am empathizing with dog enthusiasts, who may want to claim that we are only talking about pets, and not the entire extent of the capabilities of the entire species (or race as far as the canines are concerned).
This thread, in the original post, listed all the advantages, and seemingly, all the disadvantages of both opposing species. I take this to mean a death match. Its immediately obvious that the cats win. The only predators that beat cats in a one on one fight died out 65 million years ago.

In a death match:
We have to eliminate the dogs superior social skills and the devastating predatory skills of the large cats. Even if we set up a fight between a domestic cat against a similarly sized dog. The cat will still win. It can never be a fair fight to the canines, because they completely rely on several dogs against one cat. Its been established that canine lives completely revolve and depend on a pack to (win) survive.
A cat VS. dog fight is never going to be fair to dogs.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-06-10 09:46am

Camel wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: If you want to talk about killing power, one German shepherd could easily kill pretty much any variety of domestic cat in a fight.
Common, be fair now.
At least have the courtesy to compare a similarly sized dog to a domestic cat. I would never compare a tiger to a Chihuahua!

Eliminating the fact that most dogs are bigger than any cat is hardly fair.

Camel · Post by **Camel** » 2006-06-10 09:57am

Darth Wong wrote:Eliminating the fact that most dogs are bigger than any cat is hardly fair.

If we play by your rules, then its German Shepards against house cats. If by my rules, then its Tigers against wolves.
Personally I prefer my rules.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Cats vs Dogs. GET IT ON!

Re: Cats vs Dogs. GET IT ON!

Re: Cats vs Dogs. GET IT ON!