Pictured: Lotsoforcs and everyone else on poetv.

HURR HURR HAHAHA HURRFFFF BLUH

You know I own a cat, right?

A really old now, still half feral, dog attacking cat.

Cats are awesome.

They will eat you when you die.

Gmork still labors under the fantasy that his cat loves him.

His cat does not. His cat loves the meat he will become as soon as he dies.

Be nice, Homie.

His cat may actually love him, and still eat him when he dies. You can eat the corpse of the one you love, they'd have wanted you to in order to survive.

I am being nice. I'm merely stating a scientific fact. Cats are biologically incapable of feeling love; multiple studies have borne this out.

____
http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/12/science-confirms-it-cats-dont- love-us.html
____
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/seriouslyscience/2015/10/01/ apparently-a-cat-simply-cant-love-you-the-way-a-dog-can/
____
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/cats-facts-jerks_n_45 20552.html

Perhaps I should have been more clear: Gmork's cat does not does not love him simply because he is Gmork. Rather, Gmork's cat does not love him because no cat can love a human. Gmork is not alone in being viewed by his cat as nothing more than an expendable source of food; indeed, all cat owners are hated and exploited by their feline companions.

That's just science.

Why do I have cunnilingus on the brain now?

If you have cunnilingus on the brain, you're doing it wrong.

"I know exactly what animals are or aren't capable of because I read an article once that told me everything." ~EH

Until a cat can speak, you have absolutely zero idea what emotions they are and aren't capable of, you hack-fraud.

"I am being nice. I'm merely stating a scientific fact. Cats are biologically incapable of feeling love; multiple studies have borne this out."


Hahaha, holy shit EH, are you really this dumb?

Five stars for that.

My postmortem planning involves about 10 cats; no funeral.

It's true what EvilHomer sez. Gmork, your cat does not love you. Your cat loves me, of course. Most cats do. They accrete about me like tartar on a tooth. Dogs as well, to the occasional chagrin of their owners. Dog loyalty is ...oversold in my experience.

Actually, Gmork, I think if you read my post you'll find that I have read *at least* three articles, and these articles are all drawing on extensive research and the consensus of the scientific community. You can refuse to listen to scientists who've actually studied this matter if you want (uppity scientists, "lying and getting me pissed"!) but I hardly think I qualify as the "dumb" one here.

The dumb one *would* think that.

But I agree. It's kind of the height of narcissism to believe non-human animals experience complex human emotional constructs.

Incidentally, your dog doesn't love you either. They're just programmed to get along with other things better.

Until iguanas can talk, you can't say what they're thinking EH, you nazi.

EH is wrong, I've lived with plenty of cats over the years, and some cats most definitely form strong bonds with humans (and other cats, the whole "cats are not social" myth isn't very grounded in reality).


Cat's will love you AND eat your corpse when the time is right. That's just one of the many things that makes them great.

EH thinks dogs love us.

Anyway, there is plenty of research demonstrating that cats form strong bonds with other cats (usually only one or two cats throughout their lifetime, though) and that psychologically, cats see humans as other cats, so the idea that cats form bonds wit humans isn't a big stretch at all.

"Do cats love?" is ultimately a semantic argument over an abstract, subjective, human concept that doesn't really have any practical meaning in this context anyway.

But solid trolling as usual.

Again, science. If you want to make an argument on this topic, it needs to stem from science, not from folk wisdom. If any PoEster has conducted replicable, properly-controlled experiments into the nature of cats' feelings, experiments whose results contradict those already found by published studies, then by all means - please submit your work. I, and the scientific community, would love to be proven wrong!

I suspect, however, that as with natural selection and the Earth being round, on this matter we are correct.

As is often the case in science, the interpretation is key to understanding the experimental results.

Dogs have a strong packing instinct: cats do not. Most of the tests for "love' seem to be testing for this instinct. Have you ever seen a mother cat defend her young? She'll do so to her death. Despite what such august journals as the Huffington Post may claim.

But seriously, cats bond to me like hot glue. The neighbors cat just flatly left her and now lives on my back porch. He only goes home briefly to tank up on food, then returns. He's out there now, and if I go to the window, he'll howl at me to come out. If he thinks I'm in the garage, he'll climb up a ladder I use to access the roof so he can peer right into the garage to see if I'm there. It's funny to watch him look for me. He's quite thorough. No matter what the weather or the hour, he's out there.

Also, what science tells us is that the earth is not "round". It is an oblate spheroid. If you can't even get that simple fact right, how are we to believe your more controversial claims?

"Round" is, in this context, the commonly-accepted vernacular term for "oblate spheroid" (itself technically an approximation, due to heavy pitting present across the earth's surface). You know what it means. Stop being pedantic.

As for mother cats bonding to their young, that may be so (feel free to offer some studies supporting this). Even if it were so, however, that still begs the question of relevancy: you are not a baby kitten. Your cat is not your mother, and your cat will not defend you to death - because it does not love you.

EvilHomer doesn't love you.

Prolly not. I'm imagining the milestone moment in EH's romantic relations when he pops the question, "Honey, would you eat my dead body or dispose of me in some more appropriate fashion?"

Does EvilHomer really love anything other than contrarian trolling?

"HEY GUYZ THE SCIENCE BACKS IT UP!"

>links to huffpost

... linked to three articles (HuffPo, Discover, and New York Magazine), all three of which in turn link to serious research relevant to the topic (research which you, Mr Gmork, have yet to overturn).

I really don't see how it can be construed as "contrarian" to point out the opinion of established science, then take its side.

As serious as research can be that sets out to prove something doesn't something.

I get that Gmork, I get that.

For those of you outside the loop, HuffPo was rated "shit sandwich" by the AAAS.

"EvilHomer
Again, science. If you want to make an argument on this topic, it needs to stem from science, not from folk wisdom."

It does, I just don't care enough to find sources.

Also animal psychology is even less of a real science than human psychology, so if we're talking about the emotional life of animals it's all folk wisdom, sources or no sources.

I'm not hearing a lot of 'finding sources that challenge my assertion', and am hearing a lot of 'avoiding finding sources that challenge my assertion'.

Meanwhile, here's two MORE articles in favor of the scientific consensus:

____
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/01/140127-cats-pe ts-animals-nation-dogs-people-science/
____
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/201 5/09/04/your-cat-might-not-really-care-about-you-study-suggests/

http://www.poetv.com/video.php?vid=133789

what did you do with all the blood?

Keep score, of course.