“LOOK: Naturalistic science”
That’s redundant.
“had already labeled humans as animals,”
Well, we fit the description/definition. We’re not plants and we’re alive.
“why not ask every human if they really evolve or created or not?”
Because the answer would require havign made observations before they were born.
“ If both nature and species (except humans) can't talk, why bother to make them as standard in changes of species?!”
Is there an English version of this question? I can’t follow what you’re trying to express.
“HUMANS can talk,”
So, Koko the gorilla was Human?
“ can express themselves...”
When a popular chimp at one zoo died, other chimps actually consoled the human keepers who were upset by the loss.
“then, ask them. If they all say that they had evolved from lower forms of animals, then, it is natural that humans are the product of evolution process!”
I’d start by asking what position their parents were in when they were conceived. If they don’t know THAT answer, how the fuck can i trust their position on more distant origins?
“Then, Evolution is really natural.”
Science isn’t a popularity contest.
