-Demosthenes-
Internet Revolutionist
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2005
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 7
- Location
- USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
They are animals, I don't see why they would be irrelevant.Kelzie said:Insects are under the class Insecta, and therefore irrelevant.
Kelzie said:Not really, since you included domesticated dog in your example of the five most intelligent animals. Obviously, domestication doesn't have much of an effect.
Just because they are smart doesn't mean they are a valid example of natural selection. They were artificially bred to be the way they are.
Source?Bonobos also share 95% of our DNA.
And how many "parts of nature" kill animals they don't intend to eat?
Bobcats, bears, tigers, hippos, and pretty much any other territorial creature.
There are 7 on the list, so that's 6/7 or 86% non-herbivores in the top 7 (not to mention that the horse is last in the list) And that there are multiple species of great ape (7), new world monkeys (114), Dolphins and whales (144), Dogs (40), octopi (289), Crows and Ravens (43), but only 10 in the horse family. I will happily list the species of each family if you wish.Kelzie said:Actually, this is kinda bad for your thesis. Out of the top five most intelligent animals, one is an herbivore...20% is hardly a tendency.
That's 637 species non-herbivore out of 647, giving me 98.5% tendency (using the top 7 as a sample) towards non-herbivore species.
CARNIVOROUS SPECIES AND OMNIVOROUS SPECIES ARE SMARTER THAN HERBIVORES 98.5% OF THE TIME. (using our broad calculation)
Last edited: