Zoo Sends Unintentional Message

[Meh_Gerbil]

See the latest bit of idiocy on the web:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050826/...in_human_zoo_3

Unfortunately, when the sort of liberal thinking responsible for this type of daft display tries to make a point the liberals usually end up proving just the opposite. The point that was trying to be made was that humans are 'just another primate', the message couldn't be more distorted.

1: You'll note that the 'primates' on display have clothing. If those 8 individuals were, in fact, 'just another primate' they'd be naked. Why aren't they naked? The clothing confirms their status doesn't it?

2: You'll note that they are the only occupants in the zoo that are caged by their own free will. Again, another startling realization that actually drives home a different point than intended -- in fact, if they weren't there by their own free will there would be legal intervention.

3: If I took a gun to the zoo and shot a chimp and another person shot a caged 'homo sapian' what whould the difference in punishment be, you suppose? The fact is, humans aren't just another primate and if you treat any homo sapian as one that homo sapian gets pretty dern upset. Do those who put on this exhibit really want me to treat other humans as 'just another primate?'

4: If humans were in fact just another primate the caging of humans wouldn't be making a point. Re-read that if you must -- the only way the exhibit works is if humans aren't just another primate.

Is it just a the zoo promoting itself? Most likely -- however, the vaccuous statement that humans are 'just another primate' is refuted by the exhibit which makes it just a goofy promotional idea on a good day and a serious failure as a social statement on a bad day.

[Busheses]

See the latest bit of idiocy on the web:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050826/...in_human_zoo_3

Unfortunately, when the sort of liberal thinking responsible for this type of daft display tries to make a point the liberals usually end up proving just the opposite. The point that was trying to be made was that humans are 'just another primate', the message couldn't be more distorted.

1: You'll note that the 'primates' on display have clothing. If those 8 individuals were, in fact, 'just another primate' they'd be naked. Why aren't they naked? The clothing confirms their status doesn't it?

2: You'll note that they are the only occupants in the zoo that are caged by their own free will. Again, another startling realization that actually drives home a different point than intended -- in fact, if they weren't there by their own free will there would be legal intervention.

3: If I took a gun to the zoo and shot a chimp and another person shot a caged 'homo sapian' what whould the difference in punishment be, you suppose? The fact is, humans aren't just another primate and if you treat any homo sapian as one that homo sapian gets pretty dern upset. Do those who put on this exhibit really want me to treat other humans as 'just another primate?'

4: If humans were in fact just another primate the caging of humans wouldn't be making a point. Re-read that if you must -- the only way the exhibit works is if humans aren't just another primate.

Is it just a the zoo promoting itself? Most likely -- however, the vaccuous statement that humans are 'just another primate' is refuted by the exhibit which makes it just a goofy promotional idea on a good day and a serious failure as a social statement on a bad day.

This does not even need addressing. It is just an idiotic argument you are making MG.

[brother vinny]

This does not even need addressing. It is just an idiotic argument you are making MG.

I didn't think so. Indeed, I think there's more depth to MG's argument than you'd like to give him credit for.

(Ugh, I just ended a sentence with a preposition. )

[Meh_Gerbil]

This does not even need addressing. It is just an idiotic argument you are making MG.

What argument do you suppose I'm making?

[Teallaura]

I didn't think so. Indeed, I think there's more depth to MG's argument than you'd like to give him credit for.

(Ugh, I just ended a sentence with a preposition. )

"Indeed, I think there's more depth to MG's argument than for which you'd like to give him credit."


All fixed! Primate Grammar at your service!

[brother vinny]

"Indeed, I think there's more depth to MG's argument than for which you'd like to give him credit."


All fixed! Primate Grammar at your service!

I knew how to fix it, but it just didn't sound right to me.

Thanks, nonetheless.

[CatholicSage]

What argument do you suppose I'm making?

The radical right-wing Christian argument that humans are somehow above the other animals...

[jason]

See the latest bit of idiocy on the web:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050826/...in_human_zoo_3

Unfortunately, when the sort of liberal thinking responsible for this type of daft display tries to make a point the liberals usually end up proving just the opposite. The point that was trying to be made was that humans are 'just another primate', the message couldn't be more distorted.

1: You'll note that the 'primates' on display have clothing. If those 8 individuals were, in fact, 'just another primate' they'd be naked. Why aren't they naked? The clothing confirms their status doesn't it?

2: You'll note that they are the only occupants in the zoo that are caged by their own free will. Again, another startling realization that actually drives home a different point than intended -- in fact, if they weren't there by their own free will there would be legal intervention.

3: If I took a gun to the zoo and shot a chimp and another person shot a caged 'homo sapian' what whould the difference in punishment be, you suppose? The fact is, humans aren't just another primate and if you treat any homo sapian as one that homo sapian gets pretty dern upset. Do those who put on this exhibit really want me to treat other humans as 'just another primate?'

4: If humans were in fact just another primate the caging of humans wouldn't be making a point. Re-read that if you must -- the only way the exhibit works is if humans aren't just another primate.

Is it just a the zoo promoting itself? Most likely -- however, the vaccuous statement that humans are 'just another primate' is refuted by the exhibit which makes it just a goofy promotional idea on a good day and a serious failure as a social statement on a bad day.

I'm going to POTD this.

Jason

[brother vinny]

The radical right-wing Christian argument that humans are somehow above the other animals...

Well, we are. We alone, of all God's creatures, invented the d20 role-playing system. We alone invented pizza delivery. We have the freakin' information superhighway, for Pete's sake.

[nyaminche]

The radical right-wing Christian argument that humans are somehow above the other animals...

Umm... Not radical so much as Biblical....

But that's not to say that Gerbil is making it.

[Piebald]

If I took a gun to the zoo and shot a chimp and another person shot a caged 'homo sapian' what whould the difference in punishment be, you suppose?

Depends if they're wrapped in uteruses or not.

[Teallaura]

I knew how to fix it, but it just didn't sound right to me.

Thanks, nonetheless.

I figured you did (and it is an awkward sounding construction - people just don't talk like that for the most part). I was making (okay, tried to make ) the subtle point that primates other than humans don't have complex grammarical systems or the mastery of linguistics.

Too subtle, huh?

I wonder if the chimps got it?

[Thomas2003]

The radical right-wing Christian argument that humans are somehow above the other animals...

You really need to rephrase this to be correct. Here this is better:

"The Christian argument that humans are not animals."

There is no such thing as a "radical right-wing Christian" argument that men are higher animals - it's not even a Christian premise at all. No Christian makes those types of arguments.

Christians don't believe men are animals AT ALL.

[Thomas2003]

Depends if they're wrapped in uteruses or not.

Good point, a chimp abortion is probably illegal.

[ilkhani'tus]

We're primates, but just more intelligent and capable of emotion than the others.

We can make up rules and develop writing systems, and maybe most important for this discussion, we don't generally tolerate captivity that much.

Ask any cubicle worker.