Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (33346)	10/16/2001 5:43:17 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

The world animal can be defined so as to include or exclude humans. Both are valid definitions in terms of useage, which is the main thing that determines definitions. IMO both are also valid in other ways. We strongly connected to other animals, we are members of the animal "kingdom", but we are also unique and separate in some important ways. However in this case I can use your preferred definition without it effecting my argument. "human babies are even more dependent the other animal babies" appears to work just as well in that statement. Tim

To: epicure who wrote (33346)	10/16/2001 5:51:57 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

About human babies and animal "babies" This caught my attention, X. Having had both in my care, I actually respect animal babies a lot more than human ones. My human babies (and now my children's babies that are coming along) require an inordinate amount of care. They simply cannot do anything for themselves, and it goes on that way for years. Even a two year old would simply walk off a cliff if you didn't catch her first. They will crawl to the head of the stairs and just keep going. You have to spoon feed them because they don't even know how to eat for themselves. When we got our Golden pups, they already know how to do just about everything for themselves from the git-go. The only thing you have to do is to house-break them (which they learn very quickly) and you only have to do that because of stupid rules we make up. Otherwise, just let them alone when they are a month old, and they're fine. If I had it to over again, I might just have had puppies, as they don't disrupt your entire life for years. There is nothing in the animal kingdom to compare with the idiocy of babies and toddlers. I don't know how we got this far as a species. JC