: As for superiority (sorry for my absence, I know you missed me) your definitions and justifications are completely objective, there is no inherent or subjective truth to them, and even at that, the examples you choose are so bizarre, they leave me dizzy.(I think you got the meanings of subjective and objective reversed here. "Subjective" is that which is particular to a given individual; taking place in the mind of an individual (i.e. "the subject") while "Objective" pertains to material objects supposedly distinct from the mind of the perceiver. With this change, I am in full agreement.)
: Dolphins don't have libraries because they lack the motor skills to write, and I'm sure they are perfectly content with their auditory communication.
It should be added that several dolphins have demonstrated an ability to communicate with humans, as have a number of chimps, a few gorillas, and at least one orangutan. The reverse, however, is not true. To date, humans have been unable to learn to communicate in dolphin languages, and have had only the most rudimentary success in decyphering the language of our closest relatives, the chimps. Since dolphins are able to learn our language, and we are not able to learn theirs, the whole "language makes us superior" hypothesis falls apart.
: As for your insistence that the scientific community is still in deep debate about the reality of global warming, the same could be said about whether smoking causes cancer.
The argument that "there is still a debate" about this topic is based on a willful avoidance of the available evidence. I have consistently found that opponents of global warning efforts display behaviors that are common in drug addicts and alcoholics, particularly the denial that anything bad is happening. This denial state is probably based on a fear of helplessness, and is a reduction of the thinking processes to an almost infantile state.
The major problem with this state of denial is that the consequences are so dire (for us...the cockroaches will do just fine). If I saw a train comming, even if it might be on the adjacent track, rather than the one I am standing on, wouldn't it be in my best interest to get off the tracks altogether, rather than gambling that the train won't hit me?
