Re: Are we "special"?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: John Waters: "Re: Are we "special"?"
• Previous message: Paul Crowley: "Re: Are we "special"?"
• Maybe in reply to: Paul Crowley: "Are we "special"?"
• Next in thread: John Waters: "Re: Are we "special"?"

chessonp@aol.com wrote in article
<19961206143600.JAA21070@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> In article
<01bbe1cb$83a8a960$062470c2@jdwaters.dircon.co.uk>, "John
> Waters" <jdwaters@dircon.co.uk> writes:
>
> >However, please notice that I am not saying that humans
are
> >special in anyway. They are different in many ways. They
> >are the only bipedal mammal.
>
> Somehow every once in a while people forget that
kangaroos are mamals too.

JW: Well spotted. I should have said the only bipedal
placental mammal. How could I forget the Kangaroo? That's
what comes of spending three years in Australia. It dulls
your brain. ;-)

John.

• Next message: John Waters: "Re: Are we "special"?"
• Previous message: Paul Crowley: "Re: Are we "special"?"
• Maybe in reply to: Paul Crowley: "Are we "special"?"
• Next in thread: John Waters: "Re: Are we "special"?"