(March 25, 2018 at 7:11 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(March 25, 2018 at 6:53 pm)..Grandizer Wrote: "not distinct" does mean "not distinct". But the question is whether he was using the same sense of "distinct" as you wish he was using. He was clearly saying that they aren't as distinct as you make them out to be, and that they are very similar to each other in many ways. I mean, the context is there and clear to understand, regardless of whether you take issue with his word usage or not. And you know what he meant. You just want to find some fault in other people's posts just to have a go at them for not agreeing with you.
Let me explain the context to you.
We were discussing the definition of 'Species' and under that definition it stated "a DISTINCT sort or kind".
Pigs and rabbits are distinctly different, hence they belong to different kinds...
Are you going to still maintain that Chimp was taken out of context?
This is why I call Creationists/ Intelligent Design perpetuators " I.D.iots"
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!
