How far are YECs/anti-evolutionists willing to take the Linnaean classification for humans?
Perhaps we could discuss the history behind Linneaus' taxonomy, and where the traditional boundary is between humans and other animals.
AFAIK, no educated person would deny that he/she is an animal and a chordate and a mammal.
I've heard some squawk about "Primate", even though Carolus L. chose that name for the order containing humans because it was the first or the "prime" -- elevating the human order above other animals.
And every last YEC/Anti-Evo bristles at "Ape".
But, why? Why should "ape" bother them when "mammal" does not? Is it because "ape" can be derogatory?
This thread is related to the one on the micro/macro-evolution boundary, but here we are looking at the current biosphere, and how humans fit in.
K54
Perhaps we could discuss the history behind Linneaus' taxonomy, and where the traditional boundary is between humans and other animals.
AFAIK, no educated person would deny that he/she is an animal and a chordate and a mammal.
I've heard some squawk about "Primate", even though Carolus L. chose that name for the order containing humans because it was the first or the "prime" -- elevating the human order above other animals.
And every last YEC/Anti-Evo bristles at "Ape".
But, why? Why should "ape" bother them when "mammal" does not? Is it because "ape" can be derogatory?
This thread is related to the one on the micro/macro-evolution boundary, but here we are looking at the current biosphere, and how humans fit in.
K54
Comment