Incorrect Things You’ve Heard from People
- Thread starter FlameWizard492
- Start date
I've heard a few in my time, but the one that really sticks out in my mind went like this: I was standing at the giant anteater enclosure at Colchester Zoo watching it walk around, when a guy walked up next to me, peered into the enclosure and then called back to his nearby family "It's just a fox", before he walked away. Ever since then, I've imagining this fellow trying to scare away anteaters from his bins.
Ok, I'm usually ok with people who don't know, because they don't study animals, so fine.
But this is the 1st time I'm genuinely mad. "It's just a fox"
And?! Foxes are beautiful animals, and if you think that an animal is "just a fox", not worth your time, then don't go broadcasting it to everyone and not letting your family come see it just because it's "boring" to you. I'd much rather look at a fox than the boring, sleep-all-the-time lions.
Edit: ok, not mad, just really really annoyed. But still
I am not letting this guy anywhere near me. It’s honestly baffling how he got a fox from an anteater. Like buddy, I would say the majority of preschoolers know what an anteater is. How does that look like a fox to you???
Agree and please allow me to rephrase - of course different cultures and languages view the world through differerent and equally legitimate lenses. The world becomes even more beautiful when you learn a new way of seeing it. I expressed myself poorly on this point and regret it, I think what I meant is that there is an accepted global scientific viewpoint on biological matters but on reflection even that isn't true bc Eastern/Western science differs and there are many other systems within other cultures to categorise and perceive the biological world in varied ways. I was being Anglocentric and apologise for that.
Okay, well we are definitely just discussing semantics and ultimately we agree that if we allow the word 'monkey' the additional definition of simiiforme or primate then yeah okay, apes and humans etc are monkeys. But monkey also has this other accepted meaning.
I, personally, don't use monkey to mean primate - as you say, it's not scientific, and I feel that when most people (who are Anglophone) say monkey they mean the old and new world monkeys, not primates.
But literally this discussion is just semantics so there is no right or wrong. I guess I'll feel less harshly abt English-speaking people who call apes monkeys from now on (but I know it will still irk me, I can't help it!)
A long while since school for me
you aren't allowed to use it at university level.
Actually, I do remember seeing a lion get up and chase after one of the local birds that had wandered into its habitat and started bothering it. I should’ve gotten it on video.
This is my number one most hated argument wikipedia for everything below university level is completely fine to use just treat it with a healthy amount of skepticism like any source. Yes it is open source so anyone can edit it but that doesnt mean its automatically wrong because you always have people editing and checking it. It wont have the most advanced information but makes a great summary of a topic and for something like the distinction between ape and monkey it is fine to look at. What I find worse is you comparing it to the encylopedia britancia which is essentially the same format as wikipedia except behind a pay wall and only academics have editing rights. When it come to which sources I trust for information they are equal a good quick summary nothing more.
At the same time that would aslo imply we are monkeys.
Birds have feathers and are warm-blooded
So? The evolutionary separation beween "birds" and "reptiles" doesn't really exist. Just like how the distinction between "avian" and "non-avian" dinosaurs is purely based on morphology, not evolutionary genetics. Birds and reptiles both belong to the group 'reptilia'. We draw a line because they simply look different, but that line is in actuality extremely blurry and pretty much useless.
My point is that if you're willing to draw a distinction between birds and reptiles, you must also be willing to draw a distinction between apes and monkeys, because the criteria used to separate them is just as arbitrary.
(Also, my other point was that discussing the evolutionary separation of monkeys and apes is actually pointless, because the average zoogoer doesn't know or care about that; the reason they call apes monkeys is because they don't know any better, not because they're making a statement on taxonomy).
Nah the average zoogoer is definitkey thinking about their personal take on taxonomic and not just seeing funny biped in the tree and thinking monke.
there is still at least on seasonally warm blooded reptile alive and many with other systems such as gigantothermy so being warm blooded is a meh argument and there are plenty of dead reptile who had feathers and warm blood.
avian and non avian dinosaurs is definitely a taxonomic mess same with birds not all taxonomy systems have adopted them being placed under reptilia yet. Also alot more dinosaurs than people realise were just straight up birds we just couldnt see the wings or feathers.
There's even evidence that feathers are an ancestral trait of all dinos and those dinos that had scales were secondarily featherless. The evidence being that dinos off of the bird lingeage such as early ceratopsians and ornithopods have been found with feathers, and that pterosaurs which aren't dinos but share an ancestor had feathers.
Just had to nerd out about fluffy dinos for a moment.
every time someone makes a shrinkwraped piece of dino media I die a little inside. Why do all dino movies have to be grey scales and tightly wrapped skin where is the flair and colour.
So did dinosaurs and those are still considered reptiles. And dinosaurs were not the only group of warm blooded reptiles in earths history
I consider dinosaurs birds, so problem solved
Close. Birds are dinosaurs, but not all dinosaurs are birds. In the same way whales are mammals, but not all mammals are whales.
Well, therapods, I wouldn't consider a brachiosaurus a bird.
Not all theropods are birds still... Birds are a group of theropods, not sure how you think that means all theropods are birds.