- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
(Note: This is a joke, don't take this seriously.)
Pluto should be! Okay, imagine being part of a small town and havig big dreams. Yuo want to move to the big city! And finally, you do! Everyone loves you! your adorable, record breaking, and a great addition to the city. You make friends with Venus and Saturn. You follow in the footsteps of your idol, the Sun. And then a big guy in a suit comes around and measures you and kicks you out of the city becuase you are too small. And you realize your whole life was a lie. And your kitten runs away. That's what it would be like to be Pluto. So have some sympathy. Consider Pluto a planet.
-
Pirates!Cus there were REAL PIRATS!!Dunno about ninjas…Anywho!I dont like pirates cus oh i dunno THEY KILLED PEOPLE AND TOOK (spelled that horrobly) THERE TRESURE!!!!
tux
-
I'd say pirates. Ninjas also existed but I'm going to say pirates because they actually still exist while I'm pretty sure that real-life ninja assassins are over and done with.
Tux is right – real life pirates are simply nothing more that seafaring robbers. Nothing like the romanticized version in modern media like Pirates of the Carribbean… even though Jack Sparrow is hilarious.
-
-
They were both real, but I'm gonna say…
I CAN'T DECIDE!!!
Probably Pirates. Ninjas are highly romanticized.
-
Hmmm… both ninjas and pirates are awesome, but I'd say pirates are more real. There are a lot of them off the coast of Somalia. Jack Sparrow is amazing, by the way. I watched that movie yesterday, and am probably about to watch the first one with my brothers tonight. They are hilarious.
-
I can't really tell which is 'more real'.
Ninjas, as far as I remember, were families of assassins hired to combat governmental forces– let me go double-check that.
So I looked them up on Wikipedia (yay me!!!)– turns out they were a band of agents-for-hire, appearing during the unrest of the Sengoku period. They gathered information primarily, and also performed assassinations and other handy political services. It didn't say anything about ninja-families– I think I just read that in a kid's fictional-history book like thing.
Pirates weren't as swashbuckling and desperate as modernly portrayed– there was a pirate who wore a powdered wig, treated his men kindly and did buisness transactions with opponents. It was a financial thing– emperors and monarchs were always pillaging ships. The only difference between them and pirates, it would seem, were their authority levels.
-
John Hancock was a sort of a pirate! (sorry: random facts from history class)
-
-
-
I'm a little late, but…
PLUTO WILL ALWAYS BE A PLANET TO ME. I DON"T CARE ABOUT SCIENCE. OHANA MEANS FAMILY. FAMILY MEANS NO ONE GETS LEFT BEHIND.
#Viva la Pluto
-
Yeah blue!!! *high fives blue bird*
NEW QUESTION!!!!!!
drum roll please…..
WHICH IS BETTER EQUIPPED TO SURVIVE IN THE WILD, CATS OR DOGS?????? (feral and wild)
-
DOGS!!
Waddaya mean, I need more proof than that? It comes down to my personal expirience. This is a scary, and true story.
Icy was walking her tiny, adorable, yet ferocious, yet cuddly and kind, yet playful, dog down the sidewalk. She gazed ahead, and stepped forward. Until, in the yard of the blue house, she saw a dog, simply lying, peaceful, under a tree. She was two steps away from it. And then she saw the mange, the color, the body shape, and knew that it wasn't a dog. She had never been this close to one, but she knew. It was one of the things that howled in her neighborhood, if you stayed up late enough to hear it resounding from the nearby prairie.
It was a coyote, and she was two steps away from it. She stared, and her dog, normally playful with other dogs, was still, just standing there, staring at the Coyote. And the Coyote stared back, with calm eyes. And all Icy could do was start crying. And then, after minutes of standing there crying, petrified, she turned, and ran.
Ran, all the way home. (Later, she would wonder how her dog was smart enough to differentiate between Coyotes and normal dogs.) She burst upstairs and, breathless, sobbed and told her story. Her dad took her out for a drive nearby, to see it from a window, after she had begged. (He also was driving slow in the neighborhood and playing Pokemon Go in the car.)
It was still lying there. They got close, and saw it, and then..it moved. It had a limp, a leg in the back, and a paw in the front. It was hurt, but not visibly other than the limp. That was why it was out, away from the prairie (they did venture away–once we saw one just strolling down the sidewalk–but never during the day like I saw it.). They called Animal Control, hoping that they could save the poor thing, and then–
"Coyotes are hard to catch. We've only caught a dozen in about the last 25 years. They're also resilient, and can survive in the wild, even with a bad limp like that, and it will live naturally." So there you go. Animal Control aproved. As for cats–unless they're lepoards and jaguars, I would NEVER rate them under dogs. My dog, although small, could definitely hunt and survive in the wild. Not to say that cats couldn't, though.
-
Cats are more equipped to survive in the wild for the following reasons:
1.) Cats are less dependant upon humans to survive. When you have a cat, you just need to buy food, water, a scratching post… and it will take care of itself. Just a bit of love, and voila! A perfect pet. Dogs, on the other hand, need you to pick up their litter constantly, and you need to walk them every single morning… how would they survive without your love? They would mope around 'till the day they die. Cats are more "lonely" creatures, the reason why they are the ideal pet for authors. Authors need to devote more time to writing stories, and can't take the time to give a dog all the love it needs, and a cat can just take care of itself much, much better. It can catch its own food, birds, mice, fish… while dogs need you to give their their dog food. Have you ever heard of a dog in the wild catching fish and spitting out the bones? Probably not, unless it's Superdog. Cats? You don't need to be Supercat to be able to catch a fish and spit out the bones.
2.) Cats are more agile and warrior-like, the exact reason Erin Hunter used them for her "Warriors" book. Sure, she wrote about dogs, too, but they weren't 'warriors' like cats were, and they aren't as popular, because cats being warriors and suriving out in the wild is just more realistic. Definitely more realistic. Cats crouch low on the ground in a tree, waiting for prey to come their way. Dogs are more clumsy, and they can't exactly climb trees. I mean, some can, but those some are more examples of "Superdog!" That's why cats, the smart creatures, escape by climbing trees, knowing that their agility can save their lives. The pounce quickly, snatching birds out of the air, therefore being able to eat and survive out in the wild.
3.) Cats are less prone to diseases like rabies, which are more common to dogs. Cats have longer lives, the average life span of a cat being 21 years, and a dog being only 10-13 years. That's just because cats don't get sick as much. In books, it's usually the dog who gets sick or old and dies, like in Wonder. But cats don't. Crookshanks? Healthy as ever! And they are tough! In Plain Kate, *Spoiler Alert* Taggle dies, but does so heroicaly, and at the end still comes back to life and lives, because cats just battle on bravely. Something as trivial as death could never stop him!*Spoiler Ends* And his siblings, Raggle and Bone? Kings and Queens of the cats! All three survived against all odds. Bet a dog couldn't do that, huh? As for real life, the percentage of sick dogs with rabies and stuff like that are much more than cats, even wild cats and wild dogs.
So those are my three reasons why cats would survive in the wild much better than dogs.
-
True, but Dogs CAN adapt to the wild. You gave no consideration to the breed of dog, and how there are more types of dogs, and many types of dogs could survive in the wild. Dogs, when are in houses, DO need owners to pick up after them and play–but that's because they aren't in the wild.
Also, you said– In books, it's usually the dog who gets sick or old and dies, like in Wonder. But cats don't. Crookshanks? Healthy as ever! And they are tough! In Plain Kate, *Spoiler Alert* Taggle dies, but does so heroicaly, and at the end still comes back to life and lives, because cats just battle on bravely. Something as trivial as death could never stop him!*Spoiler Ends* And his siblings, Raggle and Bone? Kings and Queens of the cats! All three survived against all odds. Bet a dog couldn't do that, huh? As for real life, the percentage of sick dogs with rabies and stuff like that are much more than cats, even wild cats and wild dogs.
Yeah, I get that–but those are books….and both wild cats and wild dogs depend on the same sort of thing. Are you just picking Cats because you favor them over dogs? I like both dogs and cats, and am going from a neutral perspective, not choosing either over favor, but because they're better equipped. I think they both have about equal chances though. And yes, the Coyote story is true.
-
I guess I just favor cats over dogs… I'm not that experienced with debating. But how does the coyote story prove that dogs are better to survive in the wild than cats?
Rilla says tdye. Tye dye? You want to tye dye your T-shirts now?
-
Whoops, I was getting to that. I must've entered the CAPTCHA too early…
The point is, Coyotes are extremely similar to dogs. And they survive in the wild in a pack. Dogs sometimes stick together with other wild dogs.
That wounded Coyote? A few months later, it's still alive. Dogs are more resilient.
But Cats would be great in the wild too.
I just think dogs would be slightly better.
-
-
Although I maybe might agree that cats are better adapted to survive in the wild, I will argue for the dogs because dogs are the best.
1. Who says dogs can't hunt? Just because they don't hunt in the same way that cats do doesn't mean that they aren't good at it. My dog, when she was a puppy, used to (sadly) eat pigeons until we made her stop. Dogs have existed longer than they have been domesticated by humans. They didn't rely on humans then, and wild dogs don't either. A pack of wolves can take down a moose. Can a cat? I think not. Dogs know how to work together to accomplish something bigger. A cat can catch a squirrel or a bird. And maybe needing more love is a good thing. A dog loves you back no matter what. Wolves live in packs. They share prey. They can defend each other. Who is going to protect a lone cat in the wild when the need arises? Who is going to catch it's prey when it's hurt?
2. You don't need to be terribly agile or good at climbing trees to survive. Humans are extremely clumsy, but also the most intelligent and therefore the best at adapting. There are other ways to hunt. The hyena, for example (I know, they aren't dogs, it's just an example,) is able to run for a really long time, long enough for it to completely exhaust it's prey and kill it. Hyenas aren't exacty graceful now, are they? Dogs are much stronger than cats, and (I would assume) better accustomed to running long distances. As for the warriors series, you honestly can't compare a work of complete fiction to this. If I remember correctly, the cats were terrified of dogs. The dogs were portrayed as stupid, evil bloodthirsty monsters who hated cats. Seriously? Dogs get along fine with cats. They can be friends. And it hasn't ever been proven (to my knowledge) which species is more intelligent. And cats, as you said, are much lonlier creatures. Except for maybe a pride of lions, cats don't normally live in large groups. House cats (even if they do live in the wild) definitely don't. I wouldn't exactly call that "realistic."
3. I don't think I have enough information to argue about the disease rate, but if you were to compare things to warriors, I also seem to remember cats constantly getting sick and dying of greencough. My dog is almost never sick, unless you want to say something about cancer, which I would rather not talk about. Their lifespan I will not argue, that is true. But seriously? You can't compare real life to dogs dying in books. Authors kill dogs because the dogs are brave and beloved and because authors like to upset people for no reason. Crookshanks didn't die because there was no reason for him to. He wasn't even that important. Also nearly everyone hated him. And do cats revive from the dead in real life??? Wonder is realistic fiction. Dogs don't come back to life in realistic fiction. And how many books (besides warriors) are about a brave, beloved cat? I can think of many books about brave dogs, many of which having died in a brave way. What about Lassie? What about Old Yeller? Are cats trained to sniff out cancer and rescue people from mountains? Ok nevermind that was off topic. Forget that. Books and movies where the dog dies are famous for being sad. Have you ever heard someone talk about a sad book where the cat dies??? Authors only kill them because authors like to bring sorrow into our lives and make their characters deal with greif so that they can learn a lesson.
Ok. That took a while. I'm very sorry if that came acrross as mean, I really don't mean it to. No pun intended 😉
Also, congratulations to me because this was probably the longest post I've ever posted on the cb.
-
I'm rooting for dogs, but doesn't the little that cats get for food count? Like, a squirrel and, say, four birds a day? Can't they live on that, and dogs, too, don't really need to eat extra. But I'm sure, to the cat or dog, it makes all the difference. 🙂
-
-
-
-
-
Alone cats are but otherwise dogs.
-
Hmm.. I'd have to say that cats are more likely to be eaten. They can't defend themselves as well as dogs can. And that's just my two cents. 🙂
-
cats have whits and they do have strangth NOT as dogs but so what!?!I see ALOT of cats in the wild.Cats can be eatin by cyoties but it depends where dogs are and where cats are!Cats and dogs are AWESOME!!!But I really think that you cant just say that dogs are better than cats and cats are better than dogs!Ither way each one would win!Also it really depends on there spicies.
-
Can we have a new subject?
-
Can I make up the new topic?
-
Sure, sorry I havnt been on, life has gotten reeeeeeeeally busy. 🙁 but sure, just make sure its something no one will get really hurt over. 😉
-
Yay! The topic is… Percy Jackson series or Harry Potter series?
-
Harry potter for sure!!!!!!!
Actually I haen't read percy jackson so 😛
-
Harry Potter! I haven't read Percy Jackson in many years, but from what I remember he really annoyed me. He was such a stereotypical hero – brave, oh so funny, selfless, etc. Although the books were good, they weren't as awesome as Harry Potter.
Urgh. I can't find enough reasons for this. I just liked Harry Potter better.
-
-
-