Dictionary.com Mammal: "Any of various warm-blooded vertebrate animals of the class Mammalia, including humans, characterized by a covering of hair on the skin and, in the female, milk-producing mammary glands for nourishing the young." Virus: "- Any of various simple submicroscopic parasites of plants, animals, and bacteria that often cause disease and that consist essentially of a core of RNA or DNA surrounded by a protein coat. Unable to replicate without a host cell, viruses are typically not considered living organisms. - A disease caused by a virus. - Something that poisons one's soul or mind: the pernicious virus of racism. Computer Science. A computer virus." Conclusion: Humen are mammals, but not virusses. If your definition of virus would be "Violent lifeform that multiplies at a fast rate, easily manipulatable, driven by greed and destroying it's environment and itself wherever it goes" then I would agree though.
And a virus is also in equilibrium with its environment. Otherwise it would go extinct. The flu doesn't kill off humans on a large scale. It has no interest in it. The only out of control viruses are those that jump from other species. That means the virus and the host had no chance to co-evolve. But they will eventually. Or both go extinct. Nobody wants that. Beavers are mamals and actively destroy their environment. They put a dam up and flood the landscape. Hardly environmently friendly. In conclusion. There is nothing special about humans other that they found ways to expand their environment, making them on of the most succesful mammalian species around. The most succesful is probably the rat.
to make it clear "mammal" and "virus" are terms people made up to describe sets of things that already existed in the world. As sOmeguy posted above, our commonly accepted definition of "mammal" includes species that have hair, and have female individuals that produce milk. Humans do both, so they fall under our classification of "mammal". It doesn't, per say, make humans mammals; it make it internally consistant for us to call them mammals, just like we do cows, dogs, cats, kangaroos and elephants. Viruses are microscopic parasites made of a protein coat and reproductive material. Humans do not solely exhibit those features, so it would be internally inconsistant to call them viruses in a scientific discussion. As far as calling them viruses in a literary context, I think spuriousmonkey has handled that issue nicely.
The whole world couldn't just be one big farm, though. First of all, the population would eventually get so big that there literally wouldn't be enough room for everyone to live and grow enough food for everyone. Not to mention, without natural land the ecosystem would get so out of whack people wouldn't be able to survive. Agriculture is, indeed, a renewable resource, but it isn't flawless and it can't work forever with our growing population.
That's assuming that the world population will continue to increase indefinitely - I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. Most developed countries have relatively low population growth rates. In some cases the population is actually decreasing slowly. This has little to do with resources or food supply, and greying populations come with their own set of economic problems (young labourers become the scarce resource). Some forecasts expect the world population to peak somewhere in the middle of this century (and according to wiki, at under 10 billion).
You know, I never said this was my opinion, I just wanted to see what arguments people would post up, so don't jump on me, jump on the "philosophy". Which you did, but this message goes out to everyone.
This much is GLARINGLY obvious. Did you know that "Rain is wet"? That's the level it's gotten to. Jaybee.
14yrs old, I suppose it can't be helped. Not sure what I was thinking about at 14? Nuclear weapons and Barbie. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Were you thinking about using Nuclear Weapons on the Barbies? That'd be the first thought in my mind. And people, I told you already, I only posted that because I was interested in seeing how people would refute it, IT'S NOT MY OPINION.
Sorry, this is not everyone else's definition. To the other 6,499,999,999 people in the world, humans are mammals.
That would explain all the people mindlessly sucking the life out of everyone else, but no, I'm pretty sure that I'm a mammal. My science teacher says so...and I have a fairly complex cell structure and nervous system and all sorts of little doohickeys that make me tick. Equilibrium with anything isn't a defining characteristic of species classification...and Agent Smith was just killing time until Neo arrived to get the party really started. Rabbit's multiply and spread...we don't have rabbit vaccinations or any such monstrosity. Red pill rules...
Main characteristics of mammals Mammary glands - check Characteristic teeth (heterodont dentition) -check Single lower jawbone -check Three bones in the middle ear -check Possess hair, sweat to cool, warm blooded -check