(October 22, 2010 at 8:26 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: No you didn't, you have not provided a classification that lists bats AS birds, you provided one that lists them with birds(as opposed to plants).
Sorry, Zen, that was not your challenge to me. This was your challenge:
"And @ Rjh4, If you can come up with a classification system that can put a furbearing, lactating, tooth equipped creature in with feathered egg laying avians that don't lactate I would love to hear it. " (emphasis added)
Note, you are the one that used the word "with" instead of "as". I provided such a classification system.
(October 22, 2010 at 8:26 pm)Zen Badger Wrote: By that system you can class them with fish.
Only if fish "fly" in the same sense as birds and bats. Nonetheless, my system was simple to rebut your assertion that birds and bats can't be classified together. It would be easy enough to modify it for sea creatures to be classified separately from flying creatures and land creatures. Think about it, Zen. The living things we see do not come with a tag that says "I am a bird" or "I am a fish". Men/women classify creatures by their differences and similarities but it is also men/women that decided which differences and similarities are used for the classification system. So, in that sense, our current classificatin system is somewhat arbritrary. Other classification systems can be just as valid.