• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Animals are superior to Human Beings

smax26

smax26

New member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
32
Reaction score
6
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Of course, some may argue human beings are animals, but for the sake of semantics and this post let's assume they are different.

Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight. We separate ourselves based on our ideologies and thus create conflict. Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.

Some may argue the following points:

Animals have no culture. Rebuttal: we see several social species such as chimps living in quite complex societies who's ritualistic behavior varies from location to location. The ways they interact, eat, play, and have even been observed contemplating their dead in makeshift funerals, could be considered culture depending on how you want to define that word.

Animals cannot create beauty/art/music. Rebuttal: we see many examples of great artists such as the intricate patterns created by spider webs, certain marine animals who can create beautiful patterns in the sand to attract mates and the amazing colorful patterns creatures such as a peacock can display. As far as music goes you simply can observe the beautiful songs so many birds can produce as evidence for animals' musical abilities.

Animals are not conscious. Rebuttal: If you say they are not conscious it begs the question, compared to who? Human beings? I would agree that animals are most likely not as self conscious as human beings. However that is not to say that there are not conscious beings at all. Their consciousness may not have quite evolved to the level of humans, at least not yet. However they may very well be conscious at some level but it would be very difficult for us to measure or detect exactly how much.

Human beings are better at surviving. Rebuttal: Many species such as insects can adapt to endure even the most catastrophic of environments much more easily than humans can.

Animals cannot communicate efficiently. Rebuttal: The human language is linear, purely symbolic, and mostly utilitarian. Some animals can communicate in much more efficient ways without using clunky words. A honey bee can perform a simple dance and all of the other bees will instantly know the exact location of that flower or hive. Wales can guide themselves towards each other from many miles away. Other species can use chemical scents to communicate many pieces of information to each other in a very short amount of time.

Animals have no sense of humor. Rebuttal: How do we know this? Simply because they cannot smile or audibly produce laughter does that mean they cannot appreciate humor or amusement? When baby cubs play and fall over each other are they amusing themselves? The mother looking on, does she find the situation amusing? One monkey may enjoy yanking on the other monkeys' tails and then running away, is this not a form of amusement and sense of humor? That funny monkey can't crack jokes but may have a quite enhanced sense of humor indeed.

Any other counterpoints for humans being superior to animals I would love to hear them. Thanks!
 
Lowest Animal by Mark Twain.
 
Human beings and other animals all do what they have to do to survive in this dog-eat-dog world. :roll:
 
Hilarious, you appear to be all over the map. Btw, insects (that you use as a survival example) are not animals.
 
clownboy said:
Hilarious, you appear to be all over the map. Btw, insects (that you use as a survival example) are not animals.
Click to expand...

Glad you find it amusing haha. I've been called worse things than 'all over the map'. Btw here's what's included in the Animal category fyi:

"Animals are divided into various sub-groups, some of which are: vertebrates (birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish); molluscs (clams, oysters, octopuses, squid, snails); arthropods (millipedes, centipedes, insects, spiders, scorpions, crabs, lobsters, shrimp); annelids (earthworms, leeches); sponges; and jellyfish." - Animal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
smax26 said:
Of course, some may argue human beings are animals, but for the sake of semantics and this post let's assume they are different.

Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight. We separate ourselves based on our ideologies and thus create conflict. Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.

Some may argue the following points:

Animals have no culture. Rebuttal: we see several social species such as chimps living in quite complex societies who's ritualistic behavior varies from location to location. The ways they interact, eat, play, and have even been observed contemplating their dead in makeshift funerals, could be considered culture depending on how you want to define that word.

Animals cannot create beauty/art/music. Rebuttal: we see many examples of great artists such as the intricate patterns created by spider webs, certain marine animals who can create beautiful patterns in the sand to attract mates and the amazing colorful patterns creatures such as a peacock can display. As far as music goes you simply can observe the beautiful songs so many birds can produce as evidence for animals' musical abilities.

Animals are not conscious. Rebuttal: If you say they are not conscious it begs the question, compared to who? Human beings? I would agree that animals are most likely not as self conscious as human beings. However that is not to say that there are not conscious beings at all. Their consciousness may not have quite evolved to the level of humans, at least not yet. However they may very well be conscious at some level but it would be very difficult for us to measure or detect exactly how much.

Human beings are better at surviving. Rebuttal: Many species such as insects can adapt to endure even the most catastrophic of environments much more easily than humans can.

Animals cannot communicate efficiently. Rebuttal: The human language is linear, purely symbolic, and mostly utilitarian. Some animals can communicate in much more efficient ways without using clunky words. A honey bee can perform a simple dance and all of the other bees will instantly know the exact location of that flower or hive. Wales can guide themselves towards each other from many miles away. Other species can use chemical scents to communicate many pieces of information to each other in a very short amount of time.

Animals have no sense of humor. Rebuttal: How do we know this? Simply because they cannot smile or audibly produce laughter does that mean they cannot appreciate humor or amusement? When baby cubs play and fall over each other are they amusing themselves? The mother looking on, does she find the situation amusing? One monkey may enjoy yanking on the other monkeys' tails and then running away, is this not a form of amusement and sense of humor? That funny monkey can't crack jokes but may have a quite enhanced sense of humor indeed.

Any other counterpoints for humans being superior to animals I would love to hear them. Thanks!
Click to expand...





Nonsense. Animals are orders of magnitude below humans in intellect and sapience, and even further behind in language, organization, communication, comprehension, sophistication, and ability to alter their environment.

They have nothing like history, art (deliberately creating beauty for its own sake), literature, culture, music (sound used not chiefly for communication, but for artistic expression), science, technology, innovation, or a vision of the future much beyond their own lifespan.

They don't even know they live on a planet.


Not only are animals below us, they are FAR below us.


When the First Chimpharmonic Orchesta gives an concerto of an original ape composition in the Grand Gorilla Opera House, and it looks and sounds anywhere near as sophisticated as this, get back to me:


 
My poop eating beagles who get into life or death fights over a piece of popcorn are superior to humans? LOL, okay.
 
smax26 said:
Of course, some may argue human beings are animals, but for the sake of semantics and this post let's assume they are different.

Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight. We separate ourselves based on our ideologies and thus create conflict. Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.

Some may argue the following points:

Animals have no culture. Rebuttal: we see several social species such as chimps living in quite complex societies who's ritualistic behavior varies from location to location. The ways they interact, eat, play, and have even been observed contemplating their dead in makeshift funerals, could be considered culture depending on how you want to define that word.

Animals cannot create beauty/art/music. Rebuttal: we see many examples of great artists such as the intricate patterns created by spider webs, certain marine animals who can create beautiful patterns in the sand to attract mates and the amazing colorful patterns creatures such as a peacock can display. As far as music goes you simply can observe the beautiful songs so many birds can produce as evidence for animals' musical abilities.

Animals are not conscious. Rebuttal: If you say they are not conscious it begs the question, compared to who? Human beings? I would agree that animals are most likely not as self conscious as human beings. However that is not to say that there are not conscious beings at all. Their consciousness may not have quite evolved to the level of humans, at least not yet. However they may very well be conscious at some level but it would be very difficult for us to measure or detect exactly how much.

Human beings are better at surviving. Rebuttal: Many species such as insects can adapt to endure even the most catastrophic of environments much more easily than humans can.

Animals cannot communicate efficiently. Rebuttal: The human language is linear, purely symbolic, and mostly utilitarian. Some animals can communicate in much more efficient ways without using clunky words. A honey bee can perform a simple dance and all of the other bees will instantly know the exact location of that flower or hive. Wales can guide themselves towards each other from many miles away. Other species can use chemical scents to communicate many pieces of information to each other in a very short amount of time.

Animals have no sense of humor. Rebuttal: How do we know this? Simply because they cannot smile or audibly produce laughter does that mean they cannot appreciate humor or amusement? When baby cubs play and fall over each other are they amusing themselves? The mother looking on, does she find the situation amusing? One monkey may enjoy yanking on the other monkeys' tails and then running away, is this not a form of amusement and sense of humor? That funny monkey can't crack jokes but may have a quite enhanced sense of humor indeed.

Any other counterpoints for humans being superior to animals I would love to hear them. Thanks!
Click to expand...

When they can build huge cities, make it to the moon, create governments, understand things such as rights, produce science and engineering, etc. I may then give pause to the consideration that animals are better than us. But as of right now, they can't do any of that. No animal has accomplished what humans have accomplished in the time frame humans have accomplished it on in the history of this planet.
 
smax26 said:
Of course, some may argue human beings are animals, but for the sake of semantics and this post let's assume they are different.

Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight. We separate ourselves based on our ideologies and thus create conflict. Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.

Some may argue the following points:

Animals have no culture. Rebuttal: we see several social species such as chimps living in quite complex societies who's ritualistic behavior varies from location to location. The ways they interact, eat, play, and have even been observed contemplating their dead in makeshift funerals, could be considered culture depending on how you want to define that word.

Animals cannot create beauty/art/music. Rebuttal: we see many examples of great artists such as the intricate patterns created by spider webs, certain marine animals who can create beautiful patterns in the sand to attract mates and the amazing colorful patterns creatures such as a peacock can display. As far as music goes you simply can observe the beautiful songs so many birds can produce as evidence for animals' musical abilities.

Animals are not conscious. Rebuttal: If you say they are not conscious it begs the question, compared to who? Human beings? I would agree that animals are most likely not as self conscious as human beings. However that is not to say that there are not conscious beings at all. Their consciousness may not have quite evolved to the level of humans, at least not yet. However they may very well be conscious at some level but it would be very difficult for us to measure or detect exactly how much.

Human beings are better at surviving. Rebuttal: Many species such as insects can adapt to endure even the most catastrophic of environments much more easily than humans can.

Animals cannot communicate efficiently. Rebuttal: The human language is linear, purely symbolic, and mostly utilitarian. Some animals can communicate in much more efficient ways without using clunky words. A honey bee can perform a simple dance and all of the other bees will instantly know the exact location of that flower or hive. Wales can guide themselves towards each other from many miles away. Other species can use chemical scents to communicate many pieces of information to each other in a very short amount of time.

Animals have no sense of humor. Rebuttal: How do we know this? Simply because they cannot smile or audibly produce laughter does that mean they cannot appreciate humor or amusement? When baby cubs play and fall over each other are they amusing themselves? The mother looking on, does she find the situation amusing? One monkey may enjoy yanking on the other monkeys' tails and then running away, is this not a form of amusement and sense of humor? That funny monkey can't crack jokes but may have a quite enhanced sense of humor indeed.

Any other counterpoints for humans being superior to animals I would love to hear them. Thanks!
Click to expand...

No we are superior.

Bees can dance? I can smash them.

Ants can unite in little holes in the sand? I can fill those holes with ****ing agent orange.

Chimps live in intricate societies? I can shoot em.

Wales can guide themselves towards each other from mile away? I can pick up a phone and talk to some jackass all the way around the world.

Humans win. Do I get a prize?
 
smax26 said:
Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight.
Click to expand...

Many species of animals kill their own species. Chimpanzees for example form raiding parties and raid/kill/assimilate other groups or individuals.

smax26 said:
Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.
Click to expand...

Many species of animals will in fact use up all their resources and go threw population cycles based on the amount of resources available. They will heavily reproduce when plenty of resources are available and by doing so they deplete available resources causing a big die off when resources are used up.


I personally believe that all life on earth are essentially programed to behave within a certain variance and for the most part behaving any other way just never occurs to them. Humans being more complex just happen to have a wider range of negative behaviors but we are still largely limited to a predefined pattern.
 
smax26 said:
Glad you find it amusing haha. I've been called worse things than 'all over the map'. Btw here's what's included in the Animal category fyi:

"Animals are divided into various sub-groups, some of which are: vertebrates (birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish); molluscs (clams, oysters, octopuses, squid, snails); arthropods (millipedes, centipedes, insects, spiders, scorpions, crabs, lobsters, shrimp); annelids (earthworms, leeches); sponges; and jellyfish." - Animal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Try actually reading that link. Hint, look under the "Etymology" section.

In everyday non-scientific usage the word excludes humans – that is, "animal" is often used to refer only to non-human members of the kingdom Animalia; often, only closer relatives of humans such as mammals, or mammals and other vertebrates, are meant.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely what you set up in the OP.
 
smax26 said:
Of course, some may argue human beings are animals, but for the sake of semantics and this post let's assume they are different.

Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight. We separate ourselves based on our ideologies and thus create conflict. Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.

Some may argue the following points:

Animals have no culture. Rebuttal: we see several social species such as chimps living in quite complex societies who's ritualistic behavior varies from location to location. The ways they interact, eat, play, and have even been observed contemplating their dead in makeshift funerals, could be considered culture depending on how you want to define that word.

Animals cannot create beauty/art/music. Rebuttal: we see many examples of great artists such as the intricate patterns created by spider webs, certain marine animals who can create beautiful patterns in the sand to attract mates and the amazing colorful patterns creatures such as a peacock can display. As far as music goes you simply can observe the beautiful songs so many birds can produce as evidence for animals' musical abilities.

Animals are not conscious. Rebuttal: If you say they are not conscious it begs the question, compared to who? Human beings? I would agree that animals are most likely not as self conscious as human beings. However that is not to say that there are not conscious beings at all. Their consciousness may not have quite evolved to the level of humans, at least not yet. However they may very well be conscious at some level but it would be very difficult for us to measure or detect exactly how much.

Human beings are better at surviving. Rebuttal: Many species such as insects can adapt to endure even the most catastrophic of environments much more easily than humans can.

Animals cannot communicate efficiently. Rebuttal: The human language is linear, purely symbolic, and mostly utilitarian. Some animals can communicate in much more efficient ways without using clunky words. A honey bee can perform a simple dance and all of the other bees will instantly know the exact location of that flower or hive. Wales can guide themselves towards each other from many miles away. Other species can use chemical scents to communicate many pieces of information to each other in a very short amount of time.

Animals have no sense of humor. Rebuttal: How do we know this? Simply because they cannot smile or audibly produce laughter does that mean they cannot appreciate humor or amusement? When baby cubs play and fall over each other are they amusing themselves? The mother looking on, does she find the situation amusing? One monkey may enjoy yanking on the other monkeys' tails and then running away, is this not a form of amusement and sense of humor? That funny monkey can't crack jokes but may have a quite enhanced sense of humor indeed.

Any other counterpoints for humans being superior to animals I would love to hear them. Thanks!
Click to expand...
XDW5mAp.jpg

Im sorry I didnt have time to really read through this since I was enjoying my steak and rib BBQ. Did you say something about animals being better? :2razz:
 
What animal ever dreamed of something this crazy, this awesome, this huge.... this human?


 
smax26 said:
Of course, some may argue human beings are animals, but for the sake of semantics and this post let's assume they are different.

Animal species unite amongst themselves, but human beings continue to fight. We separate ourselves based on our ideologies and thus create conflict. Animals work with their environment, humans mostly use up all of the resources, pollute, contaminate and destroy it.
Click to expand...

Animals will kill each other with great vigor. Often killing their own offspring to ensure their own survival. Some species will actually kill their entire food supply and end starving to death as a result.

Some may argue the following points:

Animals have no culture. Rebuttal: we see several social species such as chimps living in quite complex societies who's ritualistic behavior varies from location to location. The ways they interact, eat, play, and have even been observed contemplating their dead in makeshift funerals, could be considered culture depending on how you want to define that word.
Click to expand...
A conclusion that can only be arrived by assuming that the behaviors being observed are parallel human cultural activities. For all we know, when chimps hold their "funerals", they're just making sure the dead chimp is really dead before killing it's offspring, taking it mates or taking it's prime sleeping spot.


Animals cannot create beauty/art/music. Rebuttal: we see many examples of great artists such as the intricate patterns created by spider webs, certain marine animals who can create beautiful patterns in the sand to attract mates and the amazing colorful patterns creatures such as a peacock can display. As far as music goes you simply can observe the beautiful songs so many birds can produce as evidence for animals' musical abilities.
Click to expand...
Only seen as art by assuming that these are done for the sake of beauty and not functionality. Not all spider webs are beautiful, but all are functional. A peacocks feathers are nothing more than a tool for finding a mate, they are not made beautiful for nothing more than the sake of beauty.

Human beings are better at surviving. Rebuttal: Many species such as insects can adapt to endure even the most catastrophic of environments much more easily than humans can.
Click to expand...
According to many people, the smallest change in the environment can cause catastrophic damage to a specie. So which is it? Are animals adaptable to changes in their environment or aren't they??

Animals cannot communicate efficiently. Rebuttal: The human language is linear, purely symbolic, and mostly utilitarian. Some animals can communicate in much more efficient ways without using clunky words. A honey bee can perform a simple dance and all of the other bees will instantly know the exact location of that flower or hive. Wales can guide themselves towards each other from many miles away. Other species can use chemical scents to communicate many pieces of information to each other in a very short amount of time.
Click to expand...
Again, you are conflating functionality with doing something for the sake of doing it.

Animals have no sense of humor. Rebuttal: How do we know this? Simply because they cannot smile or audibly produce laughter does that mean they cannot appreciate humor or amusement? When baby cubs play and fall over each other are they amusing themselves? The mother looking on, does she find the situation amusing? One monkey may enjoy yanking on the other monkeys' tails and then running away, is this not a form of amusement and sense of humor? That funny monkey can't crack jokes but may have a quite enhanced sense of humor indeed.
Click to expand...
There you go again, assuming that because it's somethig that humans do for their purposes, that the animals are doing it for the same purposes. You have no idea if a mother lion thinks her cubs actions are humorous, she may just be thinking "That one's the first one I kill if food gets tight." As far as the monkey's pulling each other's tails is concerned, you have no idea if it's because the monkey thinks it's funny or if the monkey does it figure out if the other monkey is tough enough to stop them.

Any other counterpoints for humans being superior to animals I would love to hear them. Thanks!
Click to expand...
The entire basis for your argument is that based on how you choose to interpret their behavior, animals are superior. You make assumptions that you can't prove to make the point want to make.
 
Moon said:
My poop eating beagles who get into life or death fights over a piece of popcorn are superior to humans? LOL, okay.
Click to expand...

Lol indeed. But I suppose it all comes down to how you want to define Superiority. But to your point humans eat all sorts of nasty crap, ever seen any kids eat their own boogers for example? And to say human beings have never had life and death fights over food is ridiculous. But I would venture to say flying planes into buildings because ideology, and things such as racism, nationalism, forced slavery, torture, and genocide would qualify as Inferior qualities just to name a few.
 
smax26 said:
Lol indeed. But I suppose it all comes down to how you want to define Superiority. But to your point humans eat all sorts of nasty crap, ever seen any kids eat their own boogers for example? And to say human beings have never had life and death fights over food is ridiculous. But I would venture to say flying planes into buildings because ideology, and things such as racism, nationalism, forced slavery, torture, and genocide would qualify as Inferior qualities just to name a few.
Click to expand...
I guess we should all just kill ourselves then, and leave the world to the poop eating beagles.
 
Ikari said:
When they can build huge cities, make it to the moon, create governments, understand things such as rights, produce science and engineering, etc. I may then give pause to the consideration that animals are better than us. But as of right now, they can't do any of that. No animal has accomplished what humans have accomplished in the time frame humans have accomplished it on in the history of this planet.
Click to expand...

There's many insects that can engineer huge cities underground. And why do humans need cities in the first place? Because of our sheer numbers? Is that a superior quality or is it more of a spacial necessity and a burden because of our tendency to overpopulate certain areas?
Creating governments - why does this make us superior? Why do we need a government in the first place. Doesn't the fact that vast societies of species can coexist in peace and govern themselves already a superior quality?
Understanding rights - is being conscious of your right to live a good thing? Doesn't self awareness also bring about anxiety? Knowing your are going to die is not a burden most animals have. Some may argue ignorance is bliss - and the ignorant blissful ones are the ones leading the better lives if it comes down to happiness as being the deciding factor.

I will agree with your point on science in that it can fly us to outer space, but it's only so we can potentially escape this planet before we completely destroy it. Then we can move on and destroy the next one. Yeah us! lol
 
Moon said:
I guess we should all just kill ourselves then, and leave the world to the poop eating beagles.
Click to expand...

Some people actually suggest the earth would be better off without human beings. I would not suggest that we all kill ourselves tho lol. I would say that if you had a planet full of just poop eating beagles and one with just humans, the humans will kill themselves off quicker with their technological advances in warfare alone. All it takes is one lunatic to press the kill button that will nuke us all. Poop eating beagles don't have that problem.
 
smax26 said:
There's many insects that can engineer huge cities underground. And why do humans need cities in the first place? Because of our sheer numbers? Is that a superior quality or is it more of a spacial necessity and a burden because of our tendency to overpopulate certain areas?
Creating governments - why does this make us superior? Why do we need a government in the first place. Doesn't the fact that vast societies of species can coexist in peace and govern themselves already a superior quality?
Understanding rights - is being conscious of your right to live a good thing? Doesn't self awareness also bring about anxiety? Knowing your are going to die is not a burden most animals have. Some may argue ignorance is bliss - and the ignorant blissful ones are the ones leading the better lives if it comes down to happiness as being the deciding factor.

I will agree with your point on science in that it can fly us to outer space, but it's only so we can potentially escape this planet before we completely destroy it. Then we can move on and destroy the next one. Yeah us! lol
Click to expand...

Yes, yeah us. Insects can build intricate nests, but they can't build skyscrapers. Hell, they can't even build underground bunkers and structures the like we have. I'd like to see some ants build the Chunnel. Governments definitely make us superior because of all the necessary philosophy and structure and society that must go along with it. It demonstrates a huge capacity for intelligence, extelligence, and advanced philosophy. What animal has that? Understanding rights is a super great thing. Not only is this about self-preservation, but it employs intelligence and empathy to realize the complex structures necessary for making societies that can go to the moon.

Ignorance may be "bliss" for the ignorant. But with it, we could only be apes. Intelligence, adaptability, empathy, curiosity in levels unheard of in the animal kingdom have rocketed man to the top.
 
clownboy said:
Try actually reading that link. Hint, look under the "Etymology" section.



Which is precisely what you set up in the OP.
Click to expand...
Insects are in the Animal Kingdom. Unless you can make a compelling argument that they are fungi, plants, protists, or bacteria, they're animals.
 
Baralis said:
Many species of animals kill their own species. Chimpanzees for example form raiding parties and raid/kill/assimilate other groups or individuals.



Many species of animals will in fact use up all their resources and go threw population cycles based on the amount of resources available. They will heavily reproduce when plenty of resources are available and by doing so they deplete available resources causing a big die off when resources are used up.


I personally believe that all life on earth are essentially programed to behave within a certain variance and for the most part behaving any other way just never occurs to them. Humans being more complex just happen to have a wider range of negative behaviors but we are still largely limited to a predefined pattern.
Click to expand...

I was wondering if anyone was going to get around to correcting his assumptions regarding animals rather than simply claiming human superiority. Well done.
 
Luftwaffe said:
No we are superior.

Bees can dance? I can smash them.

Ants can unite in little holes in the sand? I can fill those holes with ****ing agent orange.

Chimps live in intricate societies? I can shoot em.

Wales can guide themselves towards each other from mile away? I can pick up a phone and talk to some jackass all the way around the world.

Humans win. Do I get a prize?
Click to expand...

So you seem to define superiority as the ability to easily kill other species is that correct? Interesting, and it says alot about yourself, however I would tend to disagree. All that proves is that we are betting killing machines (and only in controlled circumstances). Isn't there many more factors besides the ability to kill to decide which species is more superior?

As far as your telephone analogy, how exactly does using an electrical device that consumes energy and comes with a huge monthly bill more efficient than a whale call? Is it because we have more crap to talk about? Does having more crap to talk about make us superior?

Sorry, no prize for you! ;)
 
Unrepresented said:
Insects are in the Animal Kingdom. Unless you can make a compelling argument that they are fungi, plants, protists, or bacteria, they're animals.
Click to expand...

And I mentioned in my first sentence I didn't want to argue over semantics but there's always someone like this guy telling me insects are not animals...but thank you for clearing that up Unrepresented :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom