Is PeTA mouthpiece being intellectually honest? You decide.

A couple of posts ago, I discussed the case of Hiasl the chimpanzee, whom an Austrian court will decide is "human" or not. In a post yesterday, PeTA's blogger, someone named Jack, commented on it as well, on PeTA's official blog. In this post, Jack makes the claim that primatologist Volker Sommer says, and I am quoting the PeTA blogger and not Sommer here, "chimps are not just one of the homo genus". Except there is a problem with that: chimps are not one of the Homo genus at all! Chimps are part of the genus Pan, the full taxonomic name of the species being Pan troglodytes. The astute reader should notice that the PeTA blogger did not directly quote Sommer as saying that chimps are not just one of the homo genus. He merely claimed that Sommer said it. Why would that be? I find it difficult to believe that a primatologist would not know the correct taxonomic classification of the chimpanzee. Is PeTA being honest here? You decide. Given their track record, I know where I stand, but everyone can make their own call.

Notice also Ingrid Newkirk's "argument" (term used lightly) in response to those that are critical of this case, that appears at the end of the PeTA blog post. Her entire little screed is nothing but one big red herring! All she does is parrot the same old vapid AR talking points without actually addressing the issue of whether or not a chimp should, or should not, be legally, with a basis in rational scientific facts, considered human. And of course Jack, like some kind of sycophantic cheerleader, has nothing but praise for his boss's supposed prowess, claiming her response is "just perfect". Too funny.