I’d even argue that, despite not being accurate, human-dog existence is symbiotic. We’re better with each other than the sum of us as individuals. Yeah, not every dog is good with humans, and some humans shouldn’t be allowed near any animal, but on average, a human and a dog together is the most perfect pairing of two different species on the planet.
That’s not because of a chill and nice process though. It’s because our ancestors would put down any domestic animal that was unhelpful or annoying. Cats bringing us offerings of mice and other small animals is not because they are homicidal maniacs but because at one point a cat started doing that and the cats that didn’t were killed.
That’s not at all how natural selection works. Successful traits are passed on and unsuccessful ones aren’t. In the case of dogs, the canids able to tolerate being around prehistoric people were able to eat the scraps and early man found the canid provided protection and warning of other predators, it was very much a symbiotic relationship.
Feline and man for all intents and purposes just kind of agreed to exist together. As we developed agriculture and formed permanent settlements the grain attracted rodents which in turn attracted cats. The cats provided free pest control and companionship and are self-cleaning so were essentially given free reign, that relationship remains relatively unchanged.
I have no clue where you’re pulling that from, but it absolutely does not match archaeological evidence, historical evidence, or existing practices of folkways.
That’s not how selective breeding has worked for ages.
The only time culling has been used is in food animals, which is a different thing entirely.
And that cat thing? That’s bullshit entirely. There are enormously absolutely zero records of that, so unless you have actual first hand evidence you can share, you’re pulling that one out of your ass entirely, or whoever told you that was
People are still throwing bags of kittens in rivers and leaving boxes of puppies to die on the side of the road. Why do you need archaeological evidence for something that is still happening? Cats and dogs breed a lot and they have large litters. Just because you would never hurt an animal doesn’t mean that people wanted to live with that many animals in the past.
And yes, that is exactly how natural selection works. It’s death and replication.
Also, if another species is specifically culling the other species, that’s called selective breeding, not natural selection, you fucking pointy headed, ignorant cretin.
And you need archaeological evidence because you fucking claimed that’s how dogs and cats got domesticated. You made the fucking claim, and it is wrong.
Now, does animal abuse exist? absofuckinglutely
But that’s not what the fucking topic of conversation was. You, you festering pimple of a human being decided to spew the pus of your ignorance into what was a nice, friendly discussion about dogs and humans. You did so by making outright false claims and going on a tangent that’s unrelated.
Your inability to comprehend what’s being discussed, and then doubling down on something you could have looked up, like the definitions of natural selection and selective breeding shows exactly what kind of moron you are.
So, go look up those definitions. Go, look them up. But don’t waste your damn time or mine coming back to triple down by having looked it up, been shown you were wrong, but being too much of a jackass to back down and say “oh, gee, I learned something today in a science meme community”.
This, the kind of shit you’re trying to pull is what sucks about the internet. Jesus fucking christ, it’s SCIENCE MEMES and you’re coming in spouting off complete off topic bullshit, and you’re somehow surprised people are repeatedly correcting you, and you can’t be bothered to verify the fucking definitions?
depends on the person. my neighbors, who never walk their dog, barely feed it, and just let it out in the back yard for 3 hours a day (hoarders backyard in the city where all it can do is stand in the 2x2 corner where it uses the bathroom and bark, asking them to play with it) do not deserve a dog. for any responsible owner though, I agree
It doesn’t have to be vigilante justice. In a number of countries animal cruelty is illegal. The simple fact that the animal is malnourished would be enough to involve the police.
But I don’t know what country any of you live in.
And how does this disprove the millennia of evidence in favour of dogs as a positive influence on people?
I’m sorry about those kids.
I really.
Yet, I still think that my dog makes my life better in ways that I hadn’t even dreamed of before adopting her.
Before somebody says that we don’t deserve dogs, please just don’t.
We do deserve them. We basically made them and they love us and we love them.
I’d even argue that, despite not being accurate, human-dog existence is symbiotic. We’re better with each other than the sum of us as individuals. Yeah, not every dog is good with humans, and some humans shouldn’t be allowed near any animal, but on average, a human and a dog together is the most perfect pairing of two different species on the planet.
Very much agree, evolution or no. Sometimes it’s just right.
Agreed completely.
That’s not because of a chill and nice process though. It’s because our ancestors would put down any domestic animal that was unhelpful or annoying. Cats bringing us offerings of mice and other small animals is not because they are homicidal maniacs but because at one point a cat started doing that and the cats that didn’t were killed.
That’s not at all how natural selection works. Successful traits are passed on and unsuccessful ones aren’t. In the case of dogs, the canids able to tolerate being around prehistoric people were able to eat the scraps and early man found the canid provided protection and warning of other predators, it was very much a symbiotic relationship.
Feline and man for all intents and purposes just kind of agreed to exist together. As we developed agriculture and formed permanent settlements the grain attracted rodents which in turn attracted cats. The cats provided free pest control and companionship and are self-cleaning so were essentially given free reign, that relationship remains relatively unchanged.
I have no clue where you’re pulling that from, but it absolutely does not match archaeological evidence, historical evidence, or existing practices of folkways.
That’s not how selective breeding has worked for ages.
The only time culling has been used is in food animals, which is a different thing entirely.
And that cat thing? That’s bullshit entirely. There are enormously absolutely zero records of that, so unless you have actual first hand evidence you can share, you’re pulling that one out of your ass entirely, or whoever told you that was
People are still throwing bags of kittens in rivers and leaving boxes of puppies to die on the side of the road. Why do you need archaeological evidence for something that is still happening? Cats and dogs breed a lot and they have large litters. Just because you would never hurt an animal doesn’t mean that people wanted to live with that many animals in the past.
And yes, that is exactly how natural selection works. It’s death and replication.
Dude, GTFO with that shit.
Also, if another species is specifically culling the other species, that’s called selective breeding, not natural selection, you fucking pointy headed, ignorant cretin.
And you need archaeological evidence because you fucking claimed that’s how dogs and cats got domesticated. You made the fucking claim, and it is wrong.
Now, does animal abuse exist? absofuckinglutely
But that’s not what the fucking topic of conversation was. You, you festering pimple of a human being decided to spew the pus of your ignorance into what was a nice, friendly discussion about dogs and humans. You did so by making outright false claims and going on a tangent that’s unrelated.
Your inability to comprehend what’s being discussed, and then doubling down on something you could have looked up, like the definitions of natural selection and selective breeding shows exactly what kind of moron you are.
So, go look up those definitions. Go, look them up. But don’t waste your damn time or mine coming back to triple down by having looked it up, been shown you were wrong, but being too much of a jackass to back down and say “oh, gee, I learned something today in a science meme community”.
This, the kind of shit you’re trying to pull is what sucks about the internet. Jesus fucking christ, it’s SCIENCE MEMES and you’re coming in spouting off complete off topic bullshit, and you’re somehow surprised people are repeatedly correcting you, and you can’t be bothered to verify the fucking definitions?
GTFO with your bullshit.
depends on the person. my neighbors, who never walk their dog, barely feed it, and just let it out in the back yard for 3 hours a day (hoarders backyard in the city where all it can do is stand in the 2x2 corner where it uses the bathroom and bark, asking them to play with it) do not deserve a dog. for any responsible owner though, I agree
Mostly rhetorically, and without an ability to adopt this dog myself, what would vigilante justice look like in this situation?
you can try to report it to a local animal cruelty prevention group however a lot of time what they can do is very limited
It doesn’t have to be vigilante justice. In a number of countries animal cruelty is illegal. The simple fact that the animal is malnourished would be enough to involve the police. But I don’t know what country any of you live in.
Dogs show us how good we can be
Do you know what a child’s face looks like after their family Golden rips it off?
Because I do.
So, yeah, your statement still works, I guess.
And how does this disprove the millennia of evidence in favour of dogs as a positive influence on people? I’m sorry about those kids. I really. Yet, I still think that my dog makes my life better in ways that I hadn’t even dreamed of before adopting her.