“The Vikings traveled with cats. That says something too.”
Did Vikings travel with cats to the exclusion of dogs? No, they did not. So, they had the means to bring more than just one domesticated animal with them. Therefore, we can’t assume they viewed cats as more valuable based on the fact that they brought some along.
“Note also that Native Indians didn’t grow wheat or have mass graineries, as Egypt did.”
Corn doesn’t count as a grain? I’m pretty sure rodents won’t turn their nose up at it. Of course, they did build granaries as well, I don’t know where you got that notion from. Also, for all the cat people love to cite Egypt as evidence of how important cats were, they fail to mention that cats were a novelty, being domesticated there long after Egyptians were already living happily with their dogs. They may have modeled a minor goddess after them, but the fact is that one of the major deities was Anubis, who took the form of a dog. So, even by that standard, the Egyptians gave more reverence to dogs in their pantheon.
“Cats have their place in human history, don’t try to deny it.”
I’m not denying it, just putting them in their proper place, behind dogs. Dogs were most likely the first domesticated animal, and probably preceded any domestication of plants as well. They’re ubiquitous and inseparable from human history. You just cannot say the same for cats.