Like I said earlier, the amoeba was being creative. So are the mammals.
But they could not have been "being creative", even if they were doing the exact same things, before humans existed, because creativity is an abstract concept and the TERMINOLOGY did not exist before humans invented it.
Fork in the road: The actual definition of the words "create", "creation", "creative" and "creativity" are concretely defined, but is this different than the abstract concept of "creative" that we are speaking of here?
Well, i would say that the amoeba was
not creative because i think creativity implies at least a kind of neural-like system.
It's about dynamical systems absorbing information and recombining that information into something new and usefull.
An amoeba has no mechanisms for acting in new ways on basis of acquired information, unless you consider a random mutation of its genes as acquiring information.
It can only change its set of behaviours by reproducing and hoping there are variations with a change that makes them work better.