ChemiCat
Posts: 532
Joined: Nov. 2013
|
| Quote | | The word "human" is still fuzzily defined. But as far as the general public is concerned many already define a human based on first humans named Adam and Eve. Classification systems will not change, the word is not used in them anyway. It's the sort of thing for "we the people" to decide where you can get used to the way it has already been, for a couple thousand years of so. |
And this pile of ignorance is why the closest you will get to a scientist is your dentist.
"Human" may not be understood by you so "Homo" will pass so far above your head as to have ice on it. The "general public" are not as ignorant of science as you but also science isn't a voting matter. It is evidence driven whether the "general public" vote for or against it.
| Quote | | Classification systems will not change[..] |
Classification systems can and do change in the face of new evidence. Can you say "Archeaopteryx"? Is it a bird (earlier classification) or a Dinosaur (latest classification)?
| Quote | | But as far as the general public is concerned many already define a human based on first humans named Adam and Eve. |
Another assertion based on your bible-twisted 'thinking'. Who are these "General Public"? Hindus? Native Americans? Atheists? Only Bible literalists and inerrantists think this and they are wrong. As are your "General Public" As wrong as voting for the Farter.
I do feel sorry for all the gullible Americans who are still voting for and following the itinerant Snake-oil Salesmen.
|
