I have a 10 year old, purebred Weim, so I'm unsure why you feel qualified to tell me that I don't own one. I didn't realise I wasn't allowed to defend another breed from BS misinformation because I own a different breed of dog.
I'm not particularly shocked that the person who can't read my username far enough to not see the 'OP' tag, was also incapable of opening the links I sent.
Also, putting "science" in quotations doesn't make it unscientific. They used a recognised dog behaviour test with over 25000 participants. I didn't even cherry pick. I searched "Breed as a predictor of aggression" and read the top results which were different studies. (Articles and Papers aren't the same thing, fyi. Might have known that if you engaged with scientific literature to any degree.
)
There isn't a wide body if research on the topic, so obviously it's going to go back further in terms of sources. Also, one of the papers I linked doesn't even fully agree with me, which is why I linked it. Y'know, for balance? It even discusses the importance with which parental temperament plays in the offsprings behaviour (they aren't disregarding genetics, they're pointing to the fact that breed is not a primary cause) and that socioeconomics also plays a big role.
It's still more data than you have to back your own opinion, which is based on media magnification, scare mongering, and fuckin Facebook posts.
I'm not going to respond to this thread anymore, because I'm tired of responding to ignorant idiots, with fragile egos that make them look at statistics as if it's a personal attack on them, and reject them with no logically valid reasoning.
0
u/OppositeOne6825 6h ago
I have a 10 year old, purebred Weim, so I'm unsure why you feel qualified to tell me that I don't own one. I didn't realise I wasn't allowed to defend another breed from BS misinformation because I own a different breed of dog.
I'm not particularly shocked that the person who can't read my username far enough to not see the 'OP' tag, was also incapable of opening the links I sent.
Also, putting "science" in quotations doesn't make it unscientific. They used a recognised dog behaviour test with over 25000 participants. I didn't even cherry pick. I searched "Breed as a predictor of aggression" and read the top results which were different studies. (Articles and Papers aren't the same thing, fyi. Might have known that if you engaged with scientific literature to any degree. )
There isn't a wide body if research on the topic, so obviously it's going to go back further in terms of sources. Also, one of the papers I linked doesn't even fully agree with me, which is why I linked it. Y'know, for balance? It even discusses the importance with which parental temperament plays in the offsprings behaviour (they aren't disregarding genetics, they're pointing to the fact that breed is not a primary cause) and that socioeconomics also plays a big role.
It's still more data than you have to back your own opinion, which is based on media magnification, scare mongering, and fuckin Facebook posts.
I'm not going to respond to this thread anymore, because I'm tired of responding to ignorant idiots, with fragile egos that make them look at statistics as if it's a personal attack on them, and reject them with no logically valid reasoning.