At least by the 10th edition (1758, the official start for scientific
nomenclature), Linnaeus identified bats as mammals. He grouped them
with primates, which some recent evolutionary models have advocated.
I would not regard the classification of bats with birds, etc. as
scientific errors because I would not regard the relevant verses as
scientific claims.
This can be a legitimate problem to raise, in that some people do try
to take such statements as true scientific statements supporting the
authority of the Bible. Just the other day, someone was saying that
the rabbit really does chew its cud and thus science supports the
Bible. Ken Ham was mentioned as a source of information, though not
specifically for that piece of information. However, identifying
these passages as scientific errors seems to me to make the same
mistake, misinterpreting the Bible as intending to convey science.
Dr. David Campbell
Old Seashells
University of Alabama
Biodiversity & Systematics
Dept. Biological Sciences
Box 870345
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA
bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
Droitgate Spa
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 18:10:41 EDT