• licheas@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    You know that pigeons are a type of dove, right?

    Sounds rather like you don’t know what you’re talking about and don’t actually have a real argument. Most predatorial birds will take whatever they can without being too picky about it.

    Peregrine don’t care if you call it a rock dove or a pigeon, they’ll happily call it dinner. Same as they would any other kind of dove.

    this kind of reminds me of wind turbines killing birds. Sure…it’s true…but neither cats nor wind turbines could possibly threaten birds. What threatens birds more profoundly is driving a gas vehicular or subscribing to Netflix so you can watch a documentary about how evil cats are. Or…living in a city in the first place.

    Except that cats don’t reduce the overall ecological burden in the way that windmills likely do. That’s a complex topic and I’d say irrelevant.

    I could wax philosophical and wonder if it’s a general aversion to witnessing predation that makes people anti cat…but it’s probably just people who have bird feeders being really loud. Hope you win, and have fun with all the rats…another totally natural species lol.

    I rather doubt you can, actually. Seeing as your entire arguments so far have been whataboutisms and dismissive personal attacks. Uninspired ones at that.

    I’m not anti cat so much as I am “anti-letting cats out.” But you seem to think that being “anti” is a bad thing. It’s not. It’s just semantics. I’m also “anti-letting rats run free” too; and for the same reasons.

    Cats also don’t generally go after actual rats, either. They tend to go after mice and voles and other smaller (and safer,) rodents, so the “cats kill rats” isn’t really a good argument either. (Also small lizards, bugs and other smaller critters in general.)

    There’s better ways to deal with rats that don’t affect native rodents (or other native wildlife) in the way cats do. And letting cats out to hunt is dangerous for the cat on several fronts.

    • MyMindIsLikeAnOcean@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      My argument is you’re spending way too much energy thinking about outdoor cats, which are irrelevant to the larger argument of harm to the environment.

      It’s a distraction from the problem that humans themselves pose to the environment…you’d get a lot more bang for your buck and the cat problem would take care of itself it if you were less materialistic, for example.

      If you think you’re doing a goddamn thing by keeping your cat indoors, while at the same time running on the hamster wheel on consumerism…I have news for you.

      • licheas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        How much energy I spend on something is irrelevant to this conversation. You’re welcome to walk away any time if you feel you’re spending too much.

        My argument is simple:

        • it is not safe for the cats.
        • there are better, more effective, less expensive, and less impactful methods
        • cats are harmful to the environment.

        Your arguments are basically “nuhuh” and anti-consumerism screeds that belong elsewhere, and are rather a bit hypocritical considering you have to be engaging in some level of commerce just to be having this “conversation”

        Noting you say about consumerism is all that relevant. That doesn’t change anything about three points, and any criticism you’re going to make about humanity being awful also doesn’t change those three points.

        I could go on about decision theory, but humanity sucking or another irrelevant whataboutism doesn’t matter here. Those things will remain the same regardless of if you or anyone one else lets the cat out or not. A billionaire is going to do billionaire shit regardless.