are humans the superior species????

[weedguru_animal]

'It's primitive, what separates humans from animals is being able to control our instinctual urges. It's called bein civilised. '

Rasta, you surprised me with that line... Do you honestly feel that humans are generally more civilized than non-human creatures?? My experience forces me to conclude that the opposite is true i.e. the lack of civility in the human species is what sets us aside from most other species on the planet (that we are aware of). This is a conclusion that I have come to very easily. And the best example I can give, to try bring you round to my perspective, is this...
I have a major connection with cats, having spent thousands of hours in the company of various representatives of the feline race. I have studied them and to be honest, I feel that as a species, they are superior to human beings. They can sense danger and changes in the weather, communicate through mediums we can only guess at, see right through a creature's shell and straight into their soul, jump and run with divine technique and style. they are intelligent, cunning, emotive and above all AWARE, amazingly aware of everything going on around them...what other species are said to have 8 lives????
Cat certainly do not simply live 100% of instinct, and neither do most creatures once survival has been made more likely. for instance a tiger who is starving and seperated from his/her family/society of fellow tigers, will no doubt be more controlled by instincts (EAT EAT EAT) than by his/her mind. however, that same tiger, when well fed (NOT HUNGRY) and relaxing within it's family/society will be a different proposition altogether.

once food and shelter are arranged, then most creatures begin to express their Selfs... just like humans...i.e. a desperate, starving tramp, on his last legs, will no doubt be unable to do anything but run fully off instinct (EAT EAT EAT, OR PERISH).
I find it very illogical (and sometimes egotistical) of human beings to raise this 'mental control over instincts' routine as a means of distinguishing our mighty race from evey other life form that we have discovered, turned into a crop/product, or slaughtered out of existance.

A seperate route to discuss is that it maybe it us, the humans, who dis-advantage ourselves, by willingly accepting the concept that we are above all the other species, then training ourselves to force mind over matter, thought over instinct. that isn't natural.

I live off my instincts more than the average human and yes that puts me in direct confrontation with the masses, which makes communication often difficult and fiery, but also more natural and REAL.

The very essence of stifling/denigrating our instincts, is completely unnatural.

As ever I speak only for myself, and frankly I don't expect everyone to reply to this section of my post, in the same vein it was written...but then again, maybe I will be pleasantly surprised....there must be some other members who have themselves, at some stage or another, understood these very easy to reach conclusions/insights.

Some species can be very easily 'domesticated' into living alongside humans. But for a 'domesticated' human to try live like a feral cat or dog is not so easy, in fact I would suggest this reverse would be extremely difficult. I don't see the human manufactured world as a better place to be than in the wild. admittedly the western world is easier to survive, for me(not for evey human though), than in the wild, but not preferable. I would be far happier running with wolves in the forests...

Have you ever thought about the possibilities of furthering our own understanding of the earth and maybe the galaxy, through increasing our communication skills with some of the species who have lived on this planet far longer than humans??? Imagine what a shark might be able to tell us about the good ol days of 100000 BC...or what an ant might divulge of the pre-historic era......

[Ikku]

A seperate route to discuss is that it maybe it us, the humans, who dis-advantage ourselves, by willingly accepting the concept that we are above all the other species, then training ourselves to force mind over matter, thought over instinct. that isn't natural.

In many ways we are "above" other species. This is entirely subjective and depends on how you are looking at the picture. We are great survival machines, thanks to our brains, and I think to our hands. Hands evolved out of a need to climb trees, pick things up, stuff like that. It is a complete coincidence that this allowed man to create tools to master his environment (agriculture, animal domestication, etc)

While you cannot say we are the most advanced or most evolved species on the planet (technically all species have had the same amount of time to get where they are today), we are certainly the most complex, and the most intelligent. The last point is debatable, but from a purely scientific standpoint, a human is capable of a greater degree of problem solving and higher brain functions such as thought and language.

Just because we are more intelligent doesn't make us better though.

I don't see the human manufactured world as a better place to be than in the wild. admittedly the western world is easier to survive, for me(not for evey human though), than in the wild, but not preferable. I would be far happier running with wolves in the forests...

Think about how pets have it. My dogs don't have to do a thing to ensure their survival. Every day they get a dish full of food (the nutritional content controlled entirely by the domesticator), and all the water they need. They don't have to hunt for food, they don't have to search for water. How much easier can survival get?

But I looked at one of my dogs today. She's rather old (12 or 13 I think) and normally just lays on my back porch staring idly at the ground. She can't move around very quickly or hear very well, and if she were living in the wild she would have died a long time ago. But still she sits, staring at the ground in front of her and panting (for some reason a dog that pants looks more content or happy, but I don't think it really has anything to do with their mood). I realized though that she must have been staring at the same spot of ground an hour earlier, and if I came back an hour later, she'd probably still be staring there. What an incredibly dull life. She's not even young enough to hunt birds or squirrels just for fun. All she can do is eat and sleep. But she is able to keep living because of humans. Is that good or bad?

Imagine what a shark might be able to tell us about the good ol days of 100000 BC...or what an ant might divulge of the pre-historic era......

An interesting thought, but it goes back to intelligence. Sharks and ants don't waste time talking about the past, or even communicating much at all. They're too busy carrying out the survival processes without all these useless higher brain functions.

For the most part, I agree with you though. It disgusts me how much humanity, at least in our society, tries so hard to remove itself from the natural world. I think humanity is succeeding in this endeavor, and it pains me.

I just had an idea for a similar topic but I'll post it later.

[weedguru_animal]

'While you cannot say we are the most advanced or most evolved species on the planet (technically all species have had the same amount of time to get where they are today), we are certainly the most complex, and the most intelligent. The last point is debatable, but from a purely scientific standpoint, a human is capable of a greater degree of problem solving and higher brain functions such as thought and language. '

I am unsure what you mean by 'most evolved' because to evolve is essentially to change over time. Evolution doesn't neccisarily mean Improvement. And the evolutionary process of one species may spell the demise of another (species). in short, it ain't always for the best of the world as a whole...

Animals can not only communicate within their own species group but also with other species. They are aware, and in many cases capable of utilizing, of natural lines of energy which flow between all life.

Take a cat from England, a cat from australia, then fly them both to Tehran where the two feline abductees are placed in a holding cell. And observed. At the same time, a native human from the Bronx (US) has been flown in, to share another cell with a native human from Gorakpur(INDIA). Again the captives are to be observed...
If the observers were aliens, whom would they assume to be the more civil??the more advanced???And why??

I would guess that the cats would find some kind of common ground, far sooner than the humans. We rely almost so heavily on spoken communication, yet assume because animals can't 'speak', like we do, that they are below us in trms of communication abilities. The Indian and Yankee may well find some common ground, but if they didn't speak the same lanuage, this process would invariably take far longer, and perhaps the impasse may prove an irritant to either or both parties.
The example was just meant to illustrate how reliant we, as a race, are on spoken language.

When a stranger enters a cats lair, he, the stranger, is not only inspected visually by the cat, but he is subjected to all manner of invasions into his being, his soul. Cats generally only look at the eyes of creature, when they are initially sizing up it's intentions. This is because a cat knows, better than most human beings, that the eyes are the only true window into the soul, into the self. And this window can be formed of dyed glass, dirty glass, smashed glass, or even at times be almost blocked off fully with shutters.
Now just from my own experience of cats and people, I can say beyond all doubt that cats are generally better judges of people, than people themselves. By considering tone (of voice), smell, soul, mood, demeanour, experience and no doubt some kind of visibile (to cats) aura, cats build up their picture of who a person really is. How many humans do you know who judge people, and in general: every fellow creature, by use of so many measures????

Lastly, how the hell can any human being say for sure that we know what goes on in the brains of other species? Unless we can communicate with them, how can we know for sure?? we can't. The size of a brain isn't neccisarily a definite indication of thinking power. Because I know people with the same size brain as my cerebal nerve centre, but with sometimes aggravatingly different levels of thinking ability. Also, I have had the pleasure of spending considerable time with both a rat and hamster who showed more thinking power and individuality than I would find from spending the same amount of time with an average human being. those rodents have tiny brains, but they aren't dumb.

[Dr. Greenthumb]

My sociology prof. once said that through civilization humans have lost their instinct. Maybe some more than others but instinct is no longer a driving factor in society because of how much it is supressed. Begining as an infant most children are brought up by their parents and nurtured. Never really having a chance to a natural instinct. I think she made a good point with what she said. She went through different types of instincts (survival, motherly, etc.) and gave support to show that each one isnt a driving factor in people's lives.

I realized she was on to something when I ate some mushrooms after I had passed the class. Just by observing the way someone acts when on heavy doses of psychedelics you can tell that there is some kind of supressed instinct. Sometimes it can be tapped into and it's really interesting to see what you will do when you rely more on instinct than logic.

[Grrrl]

Ahhh, alas a topic of interest why am i not suprised by whom the author is well better give my tuppence worth

dictionary definition....

civilised
adj 1: having a high state of culture and development both social and technological; "terrorist acts that shocked the civilized world" [syn: civilized] [ant: noncivilized] 2: marked by refinement in taste and manners; "cultivated speech"; "cultured Bostonians"; "cultured tastes"; "a genteel old lady"; "polite society"

"Do you honestly feel that humans are generally more civilized than non-human creatures??"

In my honest opinion I feel that humans are generally more civilised than non-human creatures. However only by the dictionary definition.
High state of culture and development, both social and technological
- an example, humans lives are enterwined by emotional ties and social relationships. No human can entirely dettach themselves from every other living thing. I think that humans are more emotionally advanced than animals, and in that way it can make humans more civilised than say a cat or dog. I say this because positive emotions encourage us to take part in social bonding and strengthen relationships. Although this emotional advancement humans have over animals can lead to acts less than civil.

The second part of the defintion 2: marked by refinement in taste and manners, Seen as though manners were invented by humanity and vary throughout the world I would say that this is irrelevent to measure how civilised something is, so I am goin to disregard it.

My experience forces me to conclude that the opposite is true i.e. the lack of civility in the human species is what sets us aside from most other species on the planet

I would argue more that it is the fact humans are more emotionally intune (advanced) that sets humans aside from other species on the planet. I am not implying that animals don't have feelings, it's evident they do, I have had pets and noticed jeolousy amongst em over my attention. I had a dog that hated me and used to shit outside my bedroom door. I am merely stating that in my opinion their emotions not as advanced as ours.

My sociology prof. once said that through civilization humans have lost their instinct. Maybe some more than others but instinct is no longer a driving factor in society because of how much it is supressed.

I beg to differ. It is of my opinion that sex is an act of intinct as is forming social links. I feel that sex is an instinctual urge it can be merely curbed but never fully supressed. hence why guys wake up with erections n get random uncontrollable boners n girls get hornier when they're at their most fertile. You cant control how you feel. It is instinct to pro-create.
Also another example, look at non human creatures, such as lions. Lions form social relationships and each play a role in the working of the pride. It is an act of instinct to form relationships, it is merely survival.

As always this is merely what I think on the subject, feel free to disagree, I'm always open to hear new perspectives

jah bless


[/i]

[weedguru_animal]

I was hoping for a long repsonse from you Rasta, and you haven't failed to deliver on that hope...though of course there is much I dissagree with..

'I beg to differ. It is of my opinion that sex is an act of intinct as is forming social links. I feel that sex is an instinctual urge it can be merely curbed but never fully supressed. hence why guys wake up with erections n get random uncontrollable boners n girls get hornier when they're at their most fertile. You cant control how you feel. It is instinct to pro-create.

Only certain women have the power to control me solely through the wonderful channels of lust. And they can never be strangers, or have never been strangers. Also, there are levels to which I can lower myself in which my mind is in total control, which allows nobody the chance to try connect to me/control me through lustful channels. An instinct that can be controlled, but also an instinct that when let out the cage can be wild and heavenly, mind-blowing and all manner of lovely. I have been very fortunate, so far, with the angels who have dive-bombed into my arms from the spaceships, lucky because they have been open minded and wonderfully highly sexed. A loving connection with a kinky, gorgeous woman is one of the few free pleasures that life can provide, a nirvana type routine which must be sought, with vigour and blinkered vision, by every full-blooded (straight) male.

But, I do in fact partly agree with your point Rasta, but only if we involve the idea of a sliding scale...
For instance i couldn't maintain a mental focus strong enough to resist the very french sexual mystique of my lady's unmissable beauty, for longer than two or three days. though if i were to have a wank regularly, then I could no doubt continue to evade her amorous advances indefinately...A man needs to release every so often or he turns into a bull on heat, unable to fight against the vital energy surging through the veins, compelled, beyond reason and taste, to find a mate....a dangerous position to be in...one which I avoid (mostly).

[Ikku]

I am unsure what you mean by 'most evolved' because to evolve is essentially to change over time. Evolution doesn't neccisarily mean Improvement. And the evolutionary process of one species may spell the demise of another (species). in short, it ain't always for the best of the world as a whole...
Perhaps you misread what I said, I merely mentioned that calling humans the "most evolved" was ridiculous, because as you have said, evolution is change over time. Cats, dogs, ants, all of the animals mentioned have been evolving over the same period of time as us, their evolution simply took a different route than ours.

I would guess that the cats would find some kind of common ground, far sooner than the humans.
Surely they would be capable of interacting right off the bat, but not nearly in the same way humans can. Cats would curiously be sniffing, eyeing, touching each other, just doing everything they can to figure out who the other cat is. But they are not capable of sharing quite the same level of interaction that we share over this website. Your next point about the language barrier is true, to an extent. But it is a barrier that can be broken in many ways.

The Indian and Yankee could begin to pick up pieces of each other's language, and although neither would master the other, they would be able to communicate with rudiments of each language. They could also sink down to more basic communication, simple grunts, sounds, and gestures. Although this communicates far less, it is still quite likely more than many other animals are capable of.

Now just from my own experience of cats and people, I can say beyond all doubt that cats are generally better judges of people, than people themselves.
No argument here. Humans place far too much importance on visual appearance that they often never get around to even knowing who a person is. Sad really.

Lastly, how the hell can any human being say for sure that we know what goes on in the brains of other species?
This goes back to something you simply cannot deny. Humans are simply more intelligent than anything else on this planet. I am not trying to be egotistical, it is a simple fact. Through the study of the brain and nervous systems of all kinds of animals (neuroscience), we have developed an understanding of how these things work. Science is the pinnacle of human reason and knowledge, we know these things through careful study and observation.

Because I know people with the same size brain as my cerebal nerve centre, but with sometimes aggravatingly different levels of thinking ability.
Knowledge and intelligence are not the same thing. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It is not simply "smarts" as it is a broad and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings, making sense of things, and figuring out what to do. Some animals can do this to an extent, but humans are simply more intelligent than other animals. Fact.

Also, I have had the pleasure of spending considerable time with both a rat and hamster who showed more thinking power and individuality than I would find from spending the same amount of time with an average human being. those rodents have tiny brains, but they aren't dumb.
These people (I am calling them people because I definitely believe that animals have the same level of individuality as humans) may be more pleasant and more friendly, but that doesn't change the facts. Their brains are adapted for responding to external stimuli, not for deep cognitive reasoning.

I must reaffirm my position. I do not think humans are in any way superior to anything else. But we are definitely more intelligent.

And animal I have nothing against rodents, but if you are going to argue for intelligence in animals over humans, you should probably be using chimps, dolphins, whales, dogs, elephants, parrots, or just anything with a bit closer level of intelligence. Cats work too. But if you really want to argue it you should be talking about the great apes, they are closely related to us biologicaly and are the most similar to us in every way, including intellectualy.

[weedguru_animal]

'you should probably be using chimps, dolphins, whales, dogs, elephants, parrots, or just anything with a bit closer level of intelligence.'

and how much time have you spent with any of these species???me, hardly any. I won't use creatures that I know only through the research of others. not for this thread...

I have used animals which I know, from my own experience, Ikku...not studies by anyone else...the conclusions are from my own studies...

also

'Humans are simply more intelligent than anything else on this planet. I am not trying to be egotistical, it is a simple fact.'

i find truly ridiculous.
Because I am not sure exactly how you would judge this intelligence. In fact, i think the opposite...mainly because for a species to have worked so hard at fucking up the planet from whence were borne, is a sign of complete ignorance. that is one the main negatively distinguishing features of humanity..We have no respect for other life, and generally assume aposition as 'this planet was made for us' rather than 'the planet made us', which the more correct sentiment.

non-human creatures communicate through channels that most humans can't comprehend...But they exist, for sure...
A cat can convey everything it wants to 'say' to another cat, merely through a series of eye-blinks or a few movements of the ultra-flexible ears, and also in these others way, which I can'y bring to words but am sure they exist...

I recall last august, when I was staying at my mums house in Kent. there are two cats which live at the residence, monty and whisper. Brothers. they came from a the rescue home, as a pair, a few years back. Anyway, one morning, last summer(uk), monty was fast asleep on my bed, whilst i was busy typing hateful emails to NTL who had fucked me out of 180 pounds (they had continued to charge me for an interent account for a house where I used to live, i had told them to stop taking the cash, given them their notice etc, but they wouldnt stop..in the end i lost a fair amount of cash, just cos those nazi money grabbing fucks refused to stop their direct debit...bkank sorted it in the end, but only to blok them, not retrieve my money.that is uk though eh)...anyway, so i was typing. money was sleeping and whisper, the hunter, was outside somewhere , on the prowl for anything that he could maine and tear to shreds, eat then spit out the intestines on the front doorstep as a marker of his predatory accomplishments...We have double galzed windows so to hear anything outside, inside must be quiet and the noise (outside) must be super loud...
Suddenly, Monty woke from his slumber, looked to the window once(though he wasnt on a level to see through it, he just glanced at it)then jupmed off thebed and catjogged with real purpose towards the back door... By the time i had got to the doorway, to see what had got into the little bruiser, Whisper was sitting on the grass, cleaning his claws whilst Monty was chomping the remaining edible parts(that is debatable) of a large bird. Not the killing that is useful to note here, but the fully silent communication. a message was sent to Monty that was neither spoken nor visually conveyed. But the message was clear and directive. There was no noise or Monty:Whisper visual connection, prior to monty meeting his brother outside the back door in the garden.

humans may well be able to do that, but the majority wouldnt even be able to comprehend not only the validity of such a story but also the significance of non-visual, non-oral communication which it appears can be just as intricate as any other communication form that we take for granted i. speech and writing...

To judge animals through measures which were generally created to measure human aspects like civility or intelligence, is extremely difficult and generall a bad idea unless these words are properly defined, from the writers POV, from the start of each post...i think that is what i must start to do...

ultimately it is the people who put animals on a different level than humans, who lack the ability to conenct with animals on common ground. so that is their loss really, as far as i am concerned. because to me, non-human creatures are generally more worthy, in terms of Soul and outlook, than human beings. i strongly feel that way, and have done for some time...

i would happily for sake my ability to speak in exchange for the the ability to convey messages to other creatures without sound or body language...to a certain degree i can tell a cat what i want it to know by looking at it eye2eye, and i can also read what it wants to tell me..basics, but yes there is some rudimentary cat 'talk' that i understand...

I can read a maths book then work out equations, which will help me with my finances for all my life and maybe lead onto a job in the financial sector. amazing grades in my accounting courses and all that bullshit...then uni...then job and career path going up , up and away....into more riches and bitches....

in the same relative period a cat learns to communicate through a multitude of channels, it learns to jump amazingly high , detect danger well before it arrives, increase its many senses to the level of sophisticated human machinery, sleep in almost any position and also avoid death 7 times. ...

in those, admittedly poorly constructed, examples. i would prefer to be the cat...and yes i would say the cat is more intelligent...but my idea of intelligence may be very different to that of others...

in fact i would say that 'mental pace' is a better term, but not one i have time to explain now...later, perhaps..when my headache has eased up...

[Ikku]

I don't know why I bother arguing with you, I agree that humans are fucked up, it's just that some of your points are completely false.

Humans are more intelligent than animals. They are also more ignorant. Sounds contradictory? Do not confuse intelligence with knowledge, or with good use of knowledge. By intelligence, I simply mean cognitive reasoning. Abstract thinking. Cats don't sit around thinking about quantum physics, or astrophysics, or philosophy (and don't tell me they do, because you know as well as I do that they don't.) They think about the world around them, and about satisfying their own needs (food, water, sex, affection, any urges they have). Cats don't sit around debating like we are doing now. That is what I mean by intelligence. It does not put us above them. It is simply a sign of how we think differently than they do.

[TYStonerTY]

Quote Weedguru_Animal: "the fully silent communication"

Im not really in this thread just thought Id comment. Anyhow, I think the way in which animals (Cats are a good example) learn to do all of those useful things (quote animal: communicate through a multitude of channels, it learns to jump amazingly high , detect danger well before it arrives, increase its many senses to the level of sophisticated human machinery, sleep in almost any position and also avoid death 7 times) is not more sophistocated, but just different. I wouldn't call a human smarter than a cat because a cat cant do trigenometry (math or w/e) and likewise I wouldnt call a cat smarter than a human because a human cant conciously communicate through a multitude of channels. They are just different types of intelligence that one animal has and the other doesnt. I actually only read about half of each post so Im not sure whatever other points are being argued, so dont flame me for that . But yeah, maybe all animals have got the same amount of intelligence, its just proportioned differently? Humans have more reasoning intelligence, kitties have more instinctual/survival intelligence .



EDIT: Oh shit, scrap all that ^ just read the above post.

[weedguru_animal]

' it's just that some of your points are completely false. '

I am more than happy to accept that my views/conclusions may not be in agreement with anybody else, but to call any of my points 'false' is insulting and a touch annoying. annoying mainly because you are talking about a completely human focussed definition of intelligence.

There is no universal measure of intelligence.

i can't know for sure, but all my experience of cats has lent me to be as close to certain, as I can be without being a cat and knowing for sure, that as a species ,yes they are more than capable of abstract thought.

Ikku, you seem unwilling to alter the scope of human words when they are used in relation to non-humans, but i guess from a strictly officious point of view, that is how the words are intended to be used....


either way. none of my comments have been false. please don't lecture me, as you have done so already, in the future, because it completely puts me off wanting any part of debate.
(and don't tell me they do, because you know as well as I do that they don't.)
when it comes to many issues, it is more proper to merely agree to differ rather than mock. especially when you can simply not be, a source of pure knowledge on the subject in question.

i can understand your views, but mine are very different.

Wise cats, cunning mice, emotional hamsters, introvert geese, sociable rhinos, inquisitive blackbirds, angry caterpillars, kind sharks, proffesional ants, efficient bees, submissive dogs, intellectual wolves, philospher giraffes, mischievous ocelots, compliant koalas, haughty wombats, friendly moths, conceited hyenas, vain peacocks, perverted dolphins, operatic whales...they all exist in my world, Ikku.

[Ikku]

I really don't want to argue over this and I truly apologize if I have offended you. I don't think you are wrong in your argument, you just aren't using intelligence in the same sense of the word as I am using it. For example, most humans are rather stupid. I believe that completely.

In fact, using a relative term of intelligence, you can say that very few humans are intelligent, while the rest are dumb. In a relative term of intelligence, very few other animals can be considered of low intelligence. I don't think the term 'stupid' applies to anything but a human.

Relatively, a cat doesn't figure out complex calculus equations because it doesn't need to. Why should it? What would it accomplish? There are better things it has to do with its time. Humans waste too much time mucking about in their own heads that they don't get the same grasp on the world around them the way other creatures do.

I'm tired now, but looking over this argument, it's all just quibbling over semantics. To answer the topic title, no, humans are not the superior species. I think we can lay this one to rest now.

[weedguru_animal]

'you just aren't using intelligence in the same sense of the word as I am using it.'

...one hour later, and with a clearer head, I can see that our agreement of the above point was the only real bone to be gnawed. so, apologies back to you, sir, if my previous post seemed somewhat emotive/impulsive... those damn instincts again eh.

you and Rasta both raised some very valid points, and I, perhaps more than most, am seriously glad to have the two of you regularly contributing to the debate forum. Because for a while this, my most beloved area, has been stagnant...but now the waters are more agitated and i feel like swimming everytime I drop by....

keep up the wicked work...

[Grrrl]

'you just aren't using intelligence in the same sense of the word as I am using it.'

...one hour later, and with a clearer head, I can see that our agreement of the above point was the only real bone to be gnawed. so, apologies back to you, sir, if my previous post seemed somewhat emotive/impulsive... those damn instincts again eh.

you and Rasta both raised some very valid points, and I, perhaps more than most, am seriously glad to have the two of you regularly contributing to the debate forum. Because for a while this, my most beloved area, has been stagnant...but now the waters are more agitated and i feel like swimming everytime I drop by....

keep up the wicked work...

well i need somewhere to vent my frustrations of everyday life i like to share perspectives on things, the more perspectives you gain, the more wisdom you have. no opinion can be wrong, only different, and the more we open our minds the more we learn about life. I, like most regulars on the debate forum, just have a thirst to learn. Some people are happy to just stay where they are, and dont want to learn, but I find those people tend to be rather dull and single minded in general. anyways, glad to be of service, il continue my rants
keep it green