To: CarolinaGuitarman
Dog is a type of animal. If you want to define Great dane and
bulldog as differing species, that's your problem, not mine.
I understand how the textbooks and scientists have made their deliniations, that's part of the argument. It's a dog. Until you establish something other than a dog, you don't have a change in species - you have a variation within it. You want to say Dog is a family level label - fine. All you're really saying is that there is a disconnect between science and common sense. I've already made that point. Next.
883 posted on
02/14/2006 2:19:33 PM PST by
Havoc
(Evolutionists and Democrats: "We aren't getting our message out" (coincidence?))
To: Havoc
"Dog is a type of animal. If you want to define Great dane and
bulldog as differing species, that's your problem, not mine."
Where did I say they were?
"It's a dog. Until you establish something other than a dog, you don't have a change in species - you have a variation within it."
Dog means more than the domestic dog. *Dog* isn't specific enough for science. The link I gave you was of the family canidae; you said they are all dogs. Foxes are members of this family; they are clearly different species than chihuahuas.
" All you're really saying is that there is a disconnect between science and common sense."
And common sense is wrong. On the other hand, most of the species level designations that scientists have discovered have also been accepted by cultures that have had extremely limited contact with science. Species describes a real biological population; *kind* doesn't.
890 posted on
02/14/2006 2:24:59 PM PST by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
To: Havoc
All you're really saying is that there is a disconnect between science and common sense.There are many disconnects between science and common sense. For example most people would say that it is common sense that if you are in a room with 190 other people then there is a greater than 50% chance that one of those people has the same birthday as you. However, that is false, no matter how strong the common sense argument that (190/365)>50% seems. Given the choice to determine what is true between common sense and science I'll go with science every time.
892 posted on
02/14/2006 2:27:13 PM PST by
Thatcherite
(More abrasive blackguard than SeaLion or ModernMan)
To: Havoc
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson