im happy for you to believe you are a primate.
I actually think you are a bit more special than that.
if that makes you angry then so be it.
: )
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
im happy for you to believe you are a primate.Asteroids do indeed come close. Your point?
No, you don't. You said that classifying humans as primates was wrong. More to the point, humans are classified as primates, and humans are more similar to other primates than some other primates are to each other. Your justification for rejecting this classification does not reflect biological reality.
Okay.I don't read your challenge threads.
I answered the question you asked. If you want a direct answer to some other question, you should ask that question, rather than the glancing ones you've been offering. If you want to know, I think Genesis 1 says nothing that could have any implication at all about whether humans should be classified as primates. That's what "I don't see why it would have made any difference" means.To be honest, I thought he was going to shuffle out of the question by saying they classified primates as humans.
But he has his own way of sidestepping the question.
I didn't expect a real answer, anyway.
What does being classified as a primate have to do with whether I'm special or not? "Primate" isn't a measure of an organism's worth. If that makes you livid with rage(*), then so be it.im happy for you to believe you are a primate.
I actually think you are a bit more special than that.
if that makes you angry then so be it.
That's not the question I was talking about.I answered the question you asked. If you want a direct answer to some other question, you should ask that question, rather than the glancing ones you've been offering. If you want to know, I think Genesis 1 says nothing that could have any implication at all about whether humans should be classified as primates. That's what "I don't see why it would have made any difference" means.
not in taxonomy.No, they're just beyond your reproach with respect to taxonomy. Unless, of course, you can provide some actual qulifications.
1.That's not the question I was talking about.
But I'll ask it again, just to see if you change your tune:
Which came first:
- Classifying humans as animals?
- Classifying humans as Homo sapiens?
Okay, thank you.
not in taxonomy.
however if I happen to be qualified to a high degree in various human sciences does this mean I am beyond reproach by all those of lesser qualifications on these subjects ?
im guessing not.
im not sure you are academically qualified to question me,You never answered my question before, so I will ask it in a different way.
If you had a significant cardiac health issue, would you put equal value to following the advice of your dentist, vs following the advice of a qualified cardiologist?
That would be like arguing with a climatologist about SN1987A, wouldn't it?If you had a significant cardiac health issue, would you put equal value to following the advice of your dentist, vs following the advice of a qualified cardiologist?
im not sure you are academically qualified to question me,
so until you prove otherwise your opinion is discounted and ignored.
sorry
(airpo law)
: (
treat it as a hypothetical question,QED
Such as?
opinions are not allowed (airpo law).What do academic qualifications have to do with my simple question? I was not giving an opinion, I was asking you for your opinion.
By the way, what are your academic credentials?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?