Should humans be removed from animal classification?

[McCulloch]

Is it that [jcrawford] feels that other primates which had been classified as Homo but not Homo sapiens should really be re-classified as Homo sapiens?

All humans are classified as humans. To classify humans as anything non-human is to dehumanize them.

It appears as if jcrawford wishes to change the accepted biological classification currently used by science.

Question for debate, "Is there any scientific justification for removing humans from the classification of animals?"

JCrawford will correct me if I am wrong, but it appears as if he would change the accepted classification of life to something like this:

1. Animal
   1. Human
   2. Non-Human
      1. Vertebrates
         1. Fish
         2. Amphibians
         3. Reptiles
         4. Birds
         5. Mammals (excluding Humans)
            1. Primates (excluding Humans)
            2. Rodents
            3. Carnivores
            4. ...
      2. Invertibrates
2. Plant
3. ...

[jcrawford]

Family = Human
Genus = Human
Species = human
Sub-species = one's racial classification.

Can I take it that you have given up on removing humans from phylum, chordata; the class, mammalia and the order, primate?

More or less, for the time being since we're basically only trying to establish human family genealogies within their own Family taxon next to the Hominidae family on their own branch of the primate phylogeny tree.

What basis do you use to determine that there should be a family within the primate order exclusively for humans rather than the currently recognized family, Hominidae which includes chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans.

To make sure neo-Darwinist race theorists don't mix up our human ancestry with common ancestors of chimps, gorillas and orangutans.

After all, the words class, order, family and human are part of the American English language nowadays and putting all American descendents of Englishmen and women on the same branch as Charlie Darwin's naturally selected and chosen ancestors is somewhat similar to the social and political situation which existed in America prior to the American Revolution. The rallying cry of "No taxation without representation" may be equally reflected in the modern day American Neanderthal war-cry of "No classification without Neanderthal representation and consultation."

Neanderthal Americans are no more Homo sapiens nowadays than we are still British subjects and neo-Darwinist name-calling amounts to nothing more than old-fashioned British biological imperialism, Anglo-Saxon racism and genetic colonization of the natives.

[jcrawford]

Jc

Not if you are the example we are to judge them by.

Grumpy

Grumpy, your choice of emoticons indicates that you may be becoming somewhat hysterical.

[Grumpy]

JC

You win, you truly are a neanderthal, at least in your behavior.

Grumpy

[Cathar1950]

"No classification without Neanderthal representation and consultation."

It will never happen because it is impossible.
I don't even think you could get a permit to rally unless they just wanted you money and a good laugh. This would be a great skit for MAD tv or SNL.
Maybe Monty Python. I could see that.

[jcrawford]

JC

You win, you truly are a neanderthal, at least in your behavior.

Grumpy

No, you win, Grumpy, because it takes two gentlemen to recognize and classify the behavior of the other.

[jcrawford]

"No classification without Neanderthal representation and consultation."

It will never happen because it is impossible.
I don't even think you could get a permit to rally unless they just wanted you money and a good laugh. This would be a great skit for MAD tv or SNL.
Maybe Monty Python. I could see that.

Maybe some of us could get a job with the circus then if we can't find employment as college professors.