A dog would not necessarily be a bad idea in a normal museum setting but if you look at the pictures of that museum everything was displayed in such a way that it would be a huge temptation for an animal. In fact, it would be a huge temptation for a small child that was under adult supervision.
Cats vs Dogs, New Scientist pet showdown…
-
-
Interesting. I've never really understood how a person could 'love' dogs and 'hate' cats or vice versa. If one loves animals, does it really matter. I have a friend that I've known for 36 years, when she was 11 she got a horse, 20 years later when that horse died of old age (he was 25) she was as devastated as she would have been if were any member of her family. And I felt for her as if he'd been a member of the family. We had had some great times over the years with that fella and he was an icon in the barn. So, really, does it matter "who's better"? Dog, cat, horse, rabbit, iguana, turtle….as long as they are loved and taken care of.
-
What I find most telling about this article is its insistence that animal intelligence should mimic that of humans or be measured by blind obedience. Cats do problem-solve and communicate as effectively as dogs, but not in ways these scientists would like them to. We can reference the numerous stories of cats saving their families from disasters like fire: http://www.clickorlando.com/family/5998305/detail.html ; http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x5994906 ; http://www.catchannel.com/news/2008/10/16/cat-saves-family-from-fire.aspx These are a few among many, many stories of cats doing a great service to humans.
We also cannot forget the service of cats during the European Black Plague, which was caused by fleas from rodents. Cats are equals to dogs, just different. I am a fan of both, although I have usually chosen to be a staff member for a cat rather than a dog owner for most of my adult life.
Good article. thank you for sharing it, NDO.
