We may need to see that. Just saying.These brought back memories. The Rowany photos look a lot like mine. I even recognize a face or two! That fourth pic is of the Little Rock War isn't it?
Loved your garb. Beautiful gowns especially. I hope I have a nice one of hubby in his pink silk Cavalier out fit somewhere...
That is amazing news for him. I hope the rabies situation works out well.I got an update last night, the vet was able to repair BOTH legs, no amputation!
However they wounds are definitely bite wounds and he was never vaccinated so he is a rabies risk. I'm not sure that he'll be coming home, I have to wait and see what the restrictions are on that.
I hope to have more information today and if it's not a risk to my family he should be home by the weekend.
I won't admit that I have resorted to keeping up at work. Never.Wonderful butt! I have trouble keeping up just on the current part of the thread. Someday I will go back in time. I think I popped my head in now and then earlier on, but have only been a “regular” for a few months, I think. I also try to keep up on threads of a couple other friends in this thread, but I am behind.
It’s an interesting debate, but probably not one for these forums.
Collins English dictionary gives this as first definition.
An animal is a living creature such as a dog, lion, or rabbit, rather than a bird, fish, insect, or human being.
We are already in trouble. Why aren’t humans listed as animals? You can see where this argument leads. Not a debate for this forum certainly.
If one kept only fish and in casual conversation mentioned to someone you had to go home to feed the animals you may get some odd looks and a comment such as I thought you only kept fish.
On the Ministry Of Agriculture forms here you are asked what animals you keep. Bees and fowl, which we keep are not listed in the animal section. So, here and in many other places, insects are not generally classified as animals. You would not should you only keep bees, say you had to return home to feed the animals.
So, at best, animals is then left as a very loose description of all living creatures except strangely humans. Back to that tricky subject again.
So, my view is, given what we know about evolution, we either include all creatures as animals, including humans, or we use another word, or be species specific.
It gets more complicated. Our classification of species is still largely Darwinian. No doubt he was a clever man but we have, or at least science has, moved on and our knowledge increased.
Chickens get referred to as birds. But, if the theory is correct and chickens were in fact a type of dinosaur which had small arms that later developed into wings and given most would acknowledge chickens have never flown like most other creatures we classify as birds, then it’s hard to see how the classification as bird is reasonable.
So, if chickens are birds then animal doesn’t seem correct. If they were dinosaurs, then they are animals and not birds.
Here in Spain and in the UK chickens are classified as fowl. Fowl is used to distinguish a number of species from birds. Perhaps this is the best compromise.
I must say I am with @ChicoryBlue on this one. There really isn't any debate in my mind that both people and chickens are animals. I forget all the other kingdoms but they are things like Plants and Fungi.
If a bunch of Agricultural bureaucrats can't be bothered to learn Linnaean taxonomy then they should be ashamed of themselves.
But we most certainly do!
Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Primates Suborder: Haplorhini Infraorder: Simiiformes Family: Hominidae Subfamily: Homininae Tribe: Hominini Genus: Homo Type species:
Sound familiar? That is you and me! And all the Agricultural bureaucrats. Though I can imagine some of those bureaucrats might be in the Phylum Mollusca and Class Gastropoda which includes a bewildering array of slugs!
I haven't the time right now to read ahead, but I think we are debating two different things, the colloquial language / common language / cultural use of certain terms, versus the scientific use of terms, whose language is pretty universal in the scientific world. So in lots of ways both or all sides of this debate are correct in my view, within their own realms of reference.But we don't. Have a look at the broad dictonary definitions. Many, not all, seperate humans from animals.
If you dig into the science then yes, humans get classified as an animal but in common usage the word animal does not include humans.
I love this post but I feel like it is a multi picture tax. At least 2 please.I haven't the time right now to read ahead, but I think we are debating two different things, the colloquial language / common language / cultural use of certain terms, versus the scientific use of terms, whose language is pretty universal in the scientific world. So in lots of ways both or all sides of this debate are correct in my view, within their own realms of reference.
We know crows also arrange themselves in family groupings, and when they roost together after a breeding pair has raised their young to where the young crows can fly and that family joins the larger group, that huge grouping is at least one extended family. I think people in different cultures name the different groupings of animals different things according to their traditions and culture. I don't know if a "murder" of crows is a term from the science world or colloquial world. I would call a bunch of crows together a flock, but I don't mean it in the famer's "kept fowl" sense. That's a cultural term I think, and you would have to know the cultural use to understand how it is meant. So when applying to a Spanish agricultural organization for a permit you need to know their language and how they use the terms.
In this sense, the common distinction of humans from other animals is cultural. It has religious origins in my view.
The scientific naming for Aves members - and whether a creature is considered a member - is debated and agreed upon through the ornithological societies and other relevant organizations. Whatever they work out becomes generally accepted science until new evidence proves otherwise. Genetic research had made huge changes in the scientific, ornithological world in species distinctions and naming.
I have pictures for my tax! Please taxman go easy!