This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

Thank you for a well researched answer.  The key in the question
(which you understood completely) is whether people "believe" humans
are not animals.  Certainly, our human-made language regarding and
actions toward non-human animals implies that humans believe
themselves superior to "animals" and that "animals" are for humans to
use, abuse, control, etc.

Thanks again for your research response.

Great, thanks a lot!

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

Thanks Hedgie, your wit and erudition were very refreshing...and
thanks to the rest of you for your diverse contributions. Fascinating
discussion.

Satisfied Phink

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

Thanks a lot, great answer. Like the different types of references
that expand and support the answer

A bit on the verbose side, but otherwise a great summary. Thanks for
your perspective, Hedgie!

This answer has not been rated.

The question wasn't really answered, probably due to a failure on my
part to accurately specify the range of the question.
However, I must say that I have no hesitation in recommending Hedgie
as a researcher, I found the responses to be clear, and the thught
behind them logical.

Good suggestions. I'll take them into consideration. Thanks for the help!

I didn't get the exact answer I hope to get - but I did learn that the
answer was not as straightforward as I expected.

Thanks for going out of your way to answer the question completely thoroughly.

This answer has not been rated.

hedgie-ga: Thanks for the interesting links, but I think the practical
answer is NO, which can be deduced from the info you supplied. In
fairness to you, I should have worded my question as it applies  to
commercial aviation. Scramjets and ramjets require speeds that cannot
be used for passenger jets. How would you get a fully loaded 747 to
Mach 5?  Space rocketry is not jet propulsion. As your GA link
explains, hydrogen contains much less energy per unit volume than jet
fuel. But, over and above all that, hydrogen must be manufactured.
Three of the four practical processes for it require, guess what,
petroleum products. The other, hydrolysis of water, requires
electrical power, which is mostly derived from, guess what again,
fossil fuels. Now, nuclear power plants could do it. It has been
estimated that to convert US cars to hydrogen fuel WITHOUT USING
FOSSIL FUELS would require more than one thousand nuclear power
plants.
Take a deep breath and hold it while this becomes reality.
monroe22

Hedgie,  the references you cited in your answer, opened a different
and unexpected path to my research.  Thank you very much.

Interesting info. No answer to the question posed, but interesting
info all the same.

There was an abundance of scientific, pedantic and philosophic debate,
so it was impossible to know what was the answer.  I only wish my
question had been better.  There was an incredible display of
knowledge, however, and I'm very impressed at the quality of research.
 Thanks!

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

Thanks for going out of your way yet again to thoroughly answer my question.

This answer has not been rated.

Thanks yall :)

Simple, concise answer.  The link with a spreadsheet was a plus.

Brilliant answer,much more detail than i had hoped for and much
appreciated. very quick

Nice links provided to supplement the answer.  And a helpful addendum
in follow up comments.

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

good answer.  thanks!

Thanks again Hedgie, yes, I remember now about your having to reply to
clarifications, but yesterday wasn't intending to force you to, just
expected that you would want to clear up my mis-thinking, which you
did, thank you, although not still having convinced me entirely.  Pity
that it's now too warm to use nature as my fridge: thinking now of
using Danziger Goldwasser, a liqeur with bits of gold foil, instead of
beer so that I could see the convection flows.
Maybe next winter ...
the tips for the film  - as well as for your generous time

The response was similar in scope and depth to others I have received
of a similar nature, suggesting a rating of 3.  However, post facto
criticisms of the offered fee are unprofessional and should have been
clarified (by use of the comments feature) before formally answering
and accepting payment; thus a rating of 2 is given.

Thank you again for your help.

Hedgie grappled with my question from several perspectives -
philosophical and physcial - and provided several useful links. In all
this I found the answer I was looking for. Thanks very much.

This answer has not been rated.

This answer has not been rated.

Well answered with further reference to publications and other
discussions on the topic. The time and energy spent in answering
proved the dollars and rating were well earnt.

This answer has not been rated.