- Aug 26, 2005
- 2,454
- 106
- 41
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
"Humans are animals". This seems to ignite a lot of arguments between scientists and creationists.
To all of the scientists, define the word "animal". Explain why humans fit this definition.
To all of the creationists, define the word "animal". Explain why humans do not fit this definition.
By all practical definitions, regardless of evolution, we are animals. If we are not animals then we are not vertebrates. If we are not animals, we definitely cannot be mammals. Would a creationist argue that humans are not mammals? If we are mammals then we are animals. If you want to make the argument that humans are not animals then you also need to deny the fact that humans are vertebrates, amniotes, mammals, etc.
(To the creationists)Are humans "mammals"? Why? If humans are mammals, how are we still not animals?
To all of the scientists, define the word "animal". Explain why humans fit this definition.
To all of the creationists, define the word "animal". Explain why humans do not fit this definition.
By all practical definitions, regardless of evolution, we are animals. If we are not animals then we are not vertebrates. If we are not animals, we definitely cannot be mammals. Would a creationist argue that humans are not mammals? If we are mammals then we are animals. If you want to make the argument that humans are not animals then you also need to deny the fact that humans are vertebrates, amniotes, mammals, etc.
(To the creationists)Are humans "mammals"? Why? If humans are mammals, how are we still not animals?