idk how much you know about bio anthropology so pardon me, but afaik neanderthals are more commonly accepted by the anthropology community as being a subspecies of homo sapiens! we're all the same guys!!! :-D
[fwiw there are also at least a handful of other extinct human subspecies that we know only a little about due to having minimal remains of them]
I mean, if Svante Paabo, THE foremost human genetics anthropologist, says "this is stupid to argue about", I doubt it's that common a belief among anthropologists? Maybe I'm appealing to authority too much though
78 notes
·
View notes
animals all have human level intelligence in my world, so it wouldn't make sense for them to herd sheep and cows or have dogs and cats for pets. so what if insects filled those roles? that opens the door to so many cool concepts. huge fluffy moths kept for their silk, mantises as livestock guardians, cricket coops instead of chicken coops, beetle species being bred for the brightest colors and shiniest shells to compete in beetle shows, tarantulas as beasts of burden, dragonflies as aerial mounts. honestly just scale them up and bugs can do anything
34 notes
·
View notes
Linnaeus having a normal time with seashells
45 notes
·
View notes
So what do you think about Land_Locked_Martian's latest fic? It's isn't completed yet, but I'm loving it.
I think it's funny as hell, poor Megatron he's gonna have to deal with Optimus being so damn hyped up and everyone wanting to know about everything to do with their relationship and the carrying cycle and just. everything.
20 notes
·
View notes
@al-hazen said : ”Considering the fact that morphology asserts that mammals are defined as beings that have hair and produce milk, a coconut is therefore a mammal.” Hello did you order one (1) Bother for dr radio—
⸻ indescribable is his expression , caught as an unsuspecting victim amidst the presence of an ineffable conclusion. the profundity of his statement , is far too large to dismiss , and it baffles the doctor how this memokeeper could settle on such a ludicrous determination. with his doctorate in biology , the scholar would not deny the flaw in linnaen taxonomy , but here , it is not a matter of the categorisation or nomenclature , rather , it is the blaring hole staring at him , blue in the face.
❝ a coconut is not a mammal. i cannot believe i am even having this discussion in the first place. ❞ drawn , his brow pulls , exhibiting an inkling of frustration. perhaps , over the rudimentary premise of this concept , being so askew. ❝ you’ve neglected to state the fundamental definition of a mammal : that they are warm — blooded vertebrates. a coconut lacks blood and bones , thereby invalidating your argument. in addition , you’ve also committed an erroneous error in categorising the hair of the coconut. better known as : coir , it is not made of keratin , like the hair and fur of animals. it is comprised of cellulose. which brings me to the most poignant distinction as to why your opinion is wrong. a coconut is classified under plantae , whilst mammals are under mammalia. ❞
he pinches the bridge of �� his nose , where he notes a throb of a pulse , from elevated blood pressure. ❝ to think i’ve wasted my time on this ridiculous matter . . . ❞
3 notes
·
View notes
I dont know why its so hard to understand that to speak of 'western civilization' doesnt imply every European(or European derived) culture is the same any more than to speak of 'mammals' implies dolphins and cheetahs are the same.
4 notes
·
View notes
I like Tumblr, I do
But I REAAAAALLLLY like Pinterest and the way you can sort your posts based on categories and interests etc.
I wonder if I can sort my posts on tumblr the same way I do on Pinterest….
Well then…..
Wooooooo
3 notes
·
View notes
Linneus invented the binomial nomenclature of biological species which started the science of taxonomy. Since taxonomy has only brought headaches to every biologist ever since, we conmemorate Linneus by puting a big fat L. in front of every plant he discovered.
20 notes
·
View notes
Science hot take: Dogs are not a single species and the concept of species shouldn’t even apply to them. The definition of a species is a group of organisms that can all reproduce with each other across multiple generations. Therefore, it is a basic law of nature that individuals of a species of sexually reproductive animals cannot vary so greatly in size that the largest males cannot safely breed with the smallest females. My dad is close to the upper bound for how tall humans can be, barring genetic disorders, and my mom is close to the lower bound, and I’m alive right now and didn’t kill my mom in the womb due to being too big of a fetus for her to support. The same would be true if I were any species of wild animal on earth. However, we have selectively bred dogs so hard over the course of thousands of years that we’ve bypassed this limit completely. If you try to breed a female Chihuahua and a male English Mastiff, it will be at best impossible and at worst lethal. Therefore, dogs are not one species. HOWEVER, they also cannot be categorized as a discrete number of different species, because different dog breeds fall onto a complete spectrum of sizes, and can all crossbreed with breeds that are a certain degree smaller or larger than them. This creates a situation where dog A and dog B can have a litter of healthy puppies together, and so can dog B and dog C, and dog C and dog D, but it’s completely impossible for dog A and dog D, similar to a dialect continuum in linguistics. This breaks the entire classification system of species, and means that dogs are neither one species, nor a discrete number of multiple species, but a new thing I am provisionally calling a species spectrum.
3 notes
·
View notes
Are you in camp 'fish aren't real' or 'fish are real, and humans are fish'
2 notes
·
View notes
addicted to kokobot
2 notes
·
View notes
something i always found interesting about the NHS and other autism diagnosis questionnaires was the juxtaposition of (paraphrasing) “I tend to notice patterns a lot” where yes = autism points, and “I can’t predict what will happen next when watching a movie/reading a book” where yes = autism points.
bit of a conundrum given how formulaic and reliably patterned 90% of media/narratives are.
i know there can be important nuances which are glossed over in these generic statements but if anything that speaks to the inadequacy of how we conceptualize and measure psychological states and relationships as a whole in a society that uses not just medical frameworks but generally taxonomy applied to humans.
1 note
·
View note
its impossible to have conversations about anything on tumblr because we all love to be sooo academic and thoughtful but as soon as our beliefs are challenged its ermmm everything is a social construct and youre a fascist for ever thinking in terms of social constructs. or, to be more concise: tumblr heard the term social construct once and hasnt shut the fuck up since
1 note
·
View note
The sangheili (Macto cognatus in latin taxonomy, meaning "I glorify my kin") are a real nuisance
0 notes
Dethroned
My destruction; your opportunity
My empire in rubble,
The crown knocked off my head,
Sitting atop yours
I’ve changed,
So have you,
The power I once held has transformed,
I ponder, am I still me?
No… afterall,
I hold a new name
You stand up straight now– don’t cower or hide like before, scurrying at the sight of me—
Tell me, does it feel good?
Does it feel good?
I’m sure it does,
Taking the place of a disgraced emperor and ruling anew, watched as our offspring barely survived, cowered and hid to survive— scurried at the sight of you— all while you transformed
I’m sure it does
I will live in this position,
And you yours,
That is simply our lot in life,
But I will not mourn when you bring about our final— complete — destruction.
You, mighty new king,
will also be dethroned,
But at your own hands.
.
1 note
·
View note