Hyperion's Dog-hating Thread

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 07:50pm

as i had stated either here or in that other thread which went to the dogs...

i don't like the small dogs because they're an ankle-biting, yippy nuisance at best. they are no where near like a cat, only comparison is maybe the brain capacity (some of the small dogs are smart enough NOT to listen to the owner), and the size, other than that they make a God-awful racket when there is any noise, the jump on you (and guests), they smell bad generally, and require walking, they're high maintenance. though the main hatred reason is the damned noise of their barking, and how hyper they are.

i will concede that the small dogs tend to be cute, but they're an irritating bunch, with sharp teeth, bad temperments, and irritating "voices"...

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 08:42pm

Hyperion wrote:as i had stated either here or in that other thread which went to the dogs...

i don't like the small dogs because they're an ankle-biting, yippy nuisance at best.

My dog never barks. He's a lapdog breed. You are forming a hasty generalization (based on the fact that you notice the yippy ones, but you don't notice the quiet ones). Try to be more rational; not all small dogs yap.

they are no where near like a cat, only comparison is maybe the brain capacity (some of the small dogs are smart enough NOT to listen to the owner), and the size, other than that they make a God-awful racket when there is any noise, the jump on you (and guests), they smell bad generally, and require walking, they're high maintenance. though the main hatred reason is the damned noise of their barking, and how hyper they are.

Ah, so you fall into the last category in my dog-hater list.

i will concede that the small dogs tend to be cute, but they're an irritating bunch, with sharp teeth, bad temperments, and irritating "voices"...

And given your conduct in any dog-related thread you can find, how does that differentiate their stereotype from YOU?

ArmorPierce · Post by **ArmorPierce** » 2002-10-07 08:46pm

ooooo imperial smackdown

(TM)

TM! NEVER FORGET THE TM!~Mr Bean

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-10-07 08:51pm

It's Imperial Smackdown (TM)! Why do people always forget the TM?

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 08:52pm

no, this is based on experience that i've had with over 90% of the small yapper/doorbell dogs I have come in contact with, evil things.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 09:06pm

what happened to page 4?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 09:21pm

Hyperion wrote:no, this is based on experience that i've had with over 90% of the small yapper/doorbell dogs I have come in contact with, evil things.

Ah, yes. Appeal to personal anecdote. The ultimate form of scientific evidence *snicker* and of course, completely defensible justification for a broad-ranging generalization.

You may note that I have not even tried to go after cats the way you go after dogs. Maybe you won't admit it, but you obviously have a serious psychological problem here, and it's definitely your problem, not ours.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 09:26pm

*whistles slightly off key* looks like this is why people tend to jump ship from this board... lol... nazis on one, imperial leadfoot on the other, and idiots on infoceptor...

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 09:33pm

Hyperion wrote:*whistles slightly off key* looks like this is why people tend to jump ship from this board... lol... nazis on one, imperial leadfoot on the other, and idiots on infoceptor...

If you hate it that much, then leave. If not, then shut yer pie hole and quit whining.

Tell you what: the day you can produce long lists of stories of cats savings kids from drowning, risking their lives to protect their masters, or helping blind people to get through life, I will acknowledge that cats are as good a friend to mankind as dogs. Until then, you're just being a whiny bitch.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 09:35pm

no, i am simply stating that outside of the programmability, a cat is vastly smarter than a dog, they're smart enough to NOT listen to the owner.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 09:40pm

Hyperion wrote:no, i am simply stating that outside of the programmability, a cat is vastly smarter than a dog, they're smart enough to NOT listen to the owner.

I already pointed out that intelligence is defined as learning ability, and cats have not demonstrated any. For the second time, you are confusing urban-suitable instincts with intelligence.

Don't make me repeat this a third time. You are rapidly approaching Darkstar Dumb-Ass(TM) status.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 09:47pm

just because i'm using a differant measure of intellgence, does NOT make me stupid or my point invalid. you are obviously blind to what i am trying to point out. have you ever seen a dog pick up a stick in it's mouth and prod something on the ground deliberately (as in not picking it up to play with it)? i've seen a cat do it. i have 7 cats, 5 of which open doors to the cuppords(sp?) and rooms to get in or out. at one time i had a dog which could open the house doors, but not the slider doors like the cats can. i've seen 3 of the cats lined up on the couch obviously WATCHING the TV (noted by the tracking of their eyes and heads and their focal points), with my dad.

this is autonomous learning, NOT external programming, dogs are capable of it, but cats are inherantly able to do it. granted i do have an exceedingly stupid one which makes the average heinz 57 dog look like a genious.

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-10-07 09:49pm

Hyperion wrote: this is autonomous learning, NOT external programming, dogs are capable of it, but cats are inherantly able to do it. granted i do have an exceedingly stupid one which makes the average heinz 57 dog look like a genious.

LOL, I love it. You make a point and contradict it in the same sentence.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 09:50pm

actually no i did not, i specified that one of 7 of my cats is dumb as a post. i did NOT contradict myself.

you are however welcome to attempt to point out where i have contradicted myself.

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-10-07 09:53pm

Hyperion wrote:this is autonomous learning, NOT external programming, dogs are capable of it, but cats are inherantly able to do it.

This is not self-contradiction?

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-10-07 09:55pm

Hyperion wrote:i've seen 3 of the cats lined up on the couch obviously WATCHING the TV (noted by the tracking of their eyes and heads and their focal points), with my dad.

You're sure their not just reacting to the motion stimuli? Cats are INCREDIBLE when it comes to detecting motion, and they make it a pastime. How else do you explain how you can amuse one by pulling a string for hours?

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 09:58pm

out of 7 cats, only one chases the laser pointer or string and that's the big fat dumb one, the rest we have to have locks on the doors to keep them out of things.

do note, it was not a contradiction, i specified that cats are INHERANTLY able to do it, whereas dogs CAN do it.

i had actually noted changes in the cats' foci and responces according to what was on the TV, i've also noted it in their responces watching the computer screen (when one is in my lap).

one point which goes without saying: do to the programmability of a dog, they are invaluble TOOLS for S&R as well as police and other emergency responce and guard duties.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 10:00pm

Hyperion wrote:just because i'm using a differant measure of intellgence, does NOT make me stupid or my point invalid.

Yes, it does. Intelligence has a proper definition, and you are deliberately ignoring it.

you are obviously blind to what i am trying to point out. have you ever seen a dog pick up a stick in it's mouth and prod something on the ground deliberately (as in not picking it up to play with it)? i've seen a cat do it.

Again, you repeat your ignorant mantra while ignoring the point: INTELLIGENCE IS LEARNING ABILITY. Cats don't learn; they have good instincts. Ergo, they are stupid. Dogs learn; ergo, they are smarter than cats. You keep bringing up examples of cats doing things which you consider clever, but you don't even TRY to demonstrate that these skills are not instinctive. An instinctive skill has precisely NOTHING to do with intelligence.

i have 7 cats, 5 of which open doors to the cuppords(sp?) and rooms to get in or out. at one time i had a dog which could open the house doors, but not the slider doors like the cats can.

More appeals to personal anecdotal evidence. Train your cats to do half the things a well-trained dog can do, and then I'll be impressed.

i've seen 3 of the cats lined up on the couch obviously WATCHING the TV (noted by the tracking of their eyes and heads and their focal points), with my dad.

Wow, your cats watch TV. This makes them geniuses?

this is autonomous learning, NOT external programming, dogs are capable of it, but cats are inherantly able to do it.

No, cats' instincts happen to be better-suited to an urban environment. The real trick is to learn something which is highly unnatural. Humans can learn abstract concepts such as mathematics, which are totally unnatural. They do this through training and education (or what you would call "external programming"). Dogs can also learn to do things which are highly unnatural. Cats cannot.

Cats are good at doing certain things, and that's it. You keep looking for examples of things that cats "learn naturally", but which are really just examples of tasks which happen to be suited to their natural disposition. But they cannot be trained to do something they are not already predisposed to do. In a human, we know that this means stupidity. For some reason, you are unwilling or unable to figure out that this also applies to cats.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 10:05pm

you say i am repeating myself, you have now repeated yourself 3 times at least on that.

and as i've already said, i'm using human style referances as the indicators of intelligence, NOT learning ability as cats can be taught with relative ease, but as a whole they don't.

here's how i know they can be taught easially (as easy if not moreso than a dog) we trained one cat to come when she's called, she will respond not only to her true name, but many non-similar sounding nicknames, a dog will respond to similar sounding names, but if you yell "hey you fatso get over here" it won't come, it may pause and look, but other than that nothing. the cat as i have determined will come even if you call her like this "corkey, come" or if you call her by this "fatass, get over here" totally disimilar. hell i could take a vid of this and prove it. took only a few times of it and she knew what i wanted her to do.

one little bit of training my family has fiddled with with both the dog and cats is getting the little furry bastards to use the toilet, the dog won't because it seems to think the toilet will eat it or something (no matter what we do it digs it's feet in and starts wimpering if the bathroom's involved and if one persists, it pisses all over the place), we got one cat to go swimming in the toilet so now we have to keep the lids closed, we have another which drinks out of the toilet like a dog, and another 2 (including "corkey") who occasionally will leave things in there like they're supposed to. and it took only 2 times each, hear'em in the litterbox, pop the top, grab the cat, plant it on the shitter and hold the critter till it does something (or falls in in the case of the one)

out of the batch there are 2 which have caused us to need to keep the doors to the bathroom closed because they like the water when you're taking a shower. and there's one we can walk on a leash like a dog.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 10:11pm

Hyperion wrote:you say i am repeating myself, you have now repeated yourself 3 times at least on that.

Of course, since you have not even tried to refute the point.

and as i've already said, i'm using human style referances as the indicators of intelligence, NOT learning ability as cats can be taught with relative ease, but as a whole they don't.

Then why can't they be trained to do anything useful? Dogs can. HUMANS can.

here's how i know they can be taught easially (as easy if not moreso than a dog) we trained one cat to come when she's called, she will respond not only to her true name, but many non-similar sounding nicknames, a dog will respond to similar sounding names, but if you yell "hey you fatso get over here" it won't come, it may pause and look, but other than that nothing. the cat as i have determined will come even if you call her like this "corkey, come" or if you call her by this "fatass, get over here" totally disimilar. hell i could take a vid of this and prove it. took only a few times of it and she knew what i wanted her to do.

So? Your cat has learned to come when called, but it's not smart enough to differentiate names. How is this something to be proud of? My dog answered to just about any name when he was a very young puppy, because he didn't know any better at the time. He quickly learned to filter out all names but his own, just as humans do. Do YOU answer to anyone who calls out "hey fatso" in public? No, you answer most readily to your own name. You are hardly proving your point about feline intelligence.

If you want to prove that cats are intelligent, show that they can be trained. If the best you can do is demonstrate a particular skill that a cat has which a dog doesn't, then you are barking up the wrong tree. Intelligence is the ability to LEARN.

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 10:13pm

i did fail to mention responces, the cat "knows" if i'm insulting her or if she's done something bad, she'll stop, but not come, calling her by either her name or any of 4 specific nicknames, she will come.

and as i had said earlier, a dog as far as i'm concerned is a WORK animal and a TOOL, and like any tool, they're high maintenance.

btw, the "intellegence is the ability to learn" is a paradigm which will most likely NOT hold true once people are out in the stars. if i remember right there is actually genetic memory/programming even in humans which precludes our species (not just individuals) to be apt to learn certain things.

following what you're saying about intellegence could be applied to the ability to learn a communications means. and yes, following that, both a cat and dog will show to have intellegence in that department, as both communicate with pheromones, sound, and posturing/expression.

a great example of why i doubt intellegence in a dog is the neighbor's schnauzer (granted, badly in need of training), for some reason it will out of the blue just stop moving dead in it's tracks and keep you from moving it over patches of CLEAR ground, the dog my family has will bark at nothing, then run headlong into the door again for no reason, and is afraid of the dot from a laser pointer, as well as cats even though it is double the size of the little buggers.
(though as stated before, they're intellegent in their own way since they can be programmed externally, but unlike humans and cats they do not learn autonomously and from experience in my observations, in fact in nature they revert to a pack mentality)

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 10:15pm

BTW, Hyperion, did it occur to you that by YOUR definitions of intelligence, a cat is smarter than a human child? After all, it takes a tremendous amount of time and effort to teach a human child the most basic skills. His skills can eventually exceed those of a cat by a significant margin, but nevertheless, much training is required. Similarly, trained dogs can do amazing things, but they must be trained. Cats can do some mildly interesting things out of the box. Yay.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 10:16pm

Hyperion wrote:i did fail to mention responces, the cat "knows" if i'm insulting her or if she's done something bad, she'll stop, but not come, calling her by either her name or any of 4 specific nicknames, she will come.

And dogs can't tell if you're mad at them? Fuck, I don't know what kind of dog you have, but if you think it's somehow remarkable that you cat knows when you're pissed at it, you need more experience with animals.

and as i had said earlier, a dog as far as i'm concerned is a WORK animal and a TOOL, and like any tool, they're high maintenance.

It is my experience that almost all dog haters' arguments against dogs work identically against human babies. You are no exception. Humans are very useful to society. They are high maintenance. Wow, we should replace humans with cats!

Hyperion · Post by **Hyperion** » 2002-10-07 10:23pm

the dog knows, it pisses on the spot or simply runs and hides under the couch, and no, we've never abused it or been excessively harsh with it.

based on the timescales involved... assuming a 6:1 aging/development ratio for cats to humans... a human baby is no more than an advanced animal for the first 3 years of it's life, in fact for the first about 6-12 months it pretty much can't learn though it is developing the pathways which allow it to. (personally i find human babies to be repulsively ugly things, but that's just me)

and once again i will say it, we're talking (at this point) 3 differant types of intellegence and learning.

to add another kernel of information, when was the last time you saw a dog go "fishing" in either a stream, pond, or fishtank? when i lived in cali we had 2 which went fishing in both my fish tank and in the pond.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2002-10-07 10:29pm

Hyperion wrote:the dog knows, it pisses on the spot or simply runs and hides under the couch, and no, we've never abused it or been excessively harsh with it.

So why do you tout your cat's ability to recognize your displeasure as proof of its superior intelligence?

BTW, as for your toilet-training example, I'm tired of dog-haters saying dogs are stupid because they won't pee in a little box like cats do. Dogs have a specific purpose for which they wish to use their pee; they mark territory with it! It is no secret why they won't pee in a little box, and it is sophistry to claim that they can't learn based on this lone example despite its obviously special nature, particularly when faced with the myriad skills that a dog can learn.

based on the timescales involved... assuming a 6:1 aging/development ratio for cats to humans... a human baby is no more than an advanced animal for the first 3 years of it's life, in fact for the first about 6-12 months it pretty much can't learn though it is developing the pathways which allow it to. (personally i find human babies to be repulsively ugly things, but that's just me)

Yet it is still far smarter than a cat. Even by 3 years of age, a human can do things a cat can't. But you must be teaching the child to do these things; your bizarre attempt to describe training as "external programming" is pure sophistry; how do you think this "programming" takes hold? It's not as if you're programming a computer by plugging instructions directly into its memory; the student must LEARN.

and once again i will say it, we're talking (at this point) 3 differant types of intellegence and learning.

Yes, I'm talking about the normal definition while you've invented some bizarre personal definition of your own, designed solely for the purpose of claiming that cats are smarter than dogs despite their untrainability.

{EDIT: by the way, thanks for confirming that dog-haters are uptight, psychologically disturbed people; your contempt for human babies confirms it beyond a doubt}