• Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    22 days ago

    Try telling anybody that Humans are animals too and there’s a better than 50% chance they will argue with you about that as well.

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    23 days ago

    I was at a trivia night and a question was, “Apart from humans, what’s the two highest populated species in the animal kingdom?”

    Now, I’m not the smartest brain inhabiting a future corpse, but I did do basics in school.

    I say to my group, “Maybe plankton? But I don’t know if there’s some technicality over that being a plant or something. If I were to guess, probably ants and then flies.” We agreed and went with that.

    NOPE!!!

    Cats and dogs apparently!!!

    This didn’t even make sense to us if considering just the mammals.

    I protested.

    The quiz master said “The question is about the animal kingdom.”

    “Well, if insects aren’t animals, what are they?”

    He dug in his heels, we weren’t getting the points. And to make things even more bizarre, most other teams said cats and/or dogs to get 1 or 2 points.

    We found a new trivia night.

    • Deceptichum@quokk.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      23 days ago

      Also isn’t there like 12 bazillion chickens per person? No fucking way could it be cats/dogs.

    • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 days ago

      The most annoying part of that is that cats and dogs both eat meat! He thinks there are more cats and dogs than the chickens and cows (etc) we feed them? What demented food web did they teach him in elementary school biology?

    • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 days ago

      “What animal breathes through its butt”

      I answered sea cucumber. They wanted sea turtle. But we complained and they accepted our answer too :)

    • stray@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      23 days ago

      Cats and dogs aren’t even species; they’re vague categories. I tried to find the actual answer to this question, but trying to nail down individual species is proving impossible. Every source is like “copepods” or “ants” like that isn’t incredibly broad. ChatGPT says it’s the Antarctic krill with 5x10^14 individuals. Going from there, the WWF says there’s over 7x10^14 , and Wikipedia only says they’re one of the most abundant species. I’m not going to get an answer to this question, and I’m going to be mildly annoyed about it infrequently for the rest of time.

    • [object Object]@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 days ago

      There might be the nuance that there are many species of ants and flies, though still idk if any one of them outdoes humans, their pets and chickens.

      Wikipedia’s page on biomass says that ants can compete with humans in global biomass (though the estimates vary wildly), but there are 15700 species of ants.

      Antarctic krill is the safest bet with shittons of them in just one species.

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        22 days ago

        They didn’t have one and just doubled down on them not having vertebrae so therefore weren’t part of the animal kingdom.

  • Wander@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    OMG in still confused at this.

    “I don’t eat animals”

    “Do you eat fish?” (My thinking people say they are vegetarian but are actually pescaterian but don’t like saying it for some reason)

    “Yea but thats not an animal”

    “Hahaha yea it is”

    “No it isnt”

    “Wait what? … If its not an animal what is it? A tree? Haha”

    “It’s a fish!”

    “Which is an animal”

    “No! An animal is an animal, and a fish is a fish!”

    “Fish are animals. Look, we can look it up to check if you want”

    “I’m not going to look it up because I know a fish isn’t an animal. I don’t need to look it up!”

    “… … I guess I can’t argue with that”

    This all took place during pre drinks which is why I thought I was getting fucked with at the start. But I never realised how so many people are walking around blindingly, confidently, unshakeably wrong. She got mad.

    • stray@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 days ago

      I’m able to understand conceptually that “meat” doesn’t literally mean any animal’s muscle tissue in every language. Sometimes it’s a more vague concept of a large mammal’s meat and excludes fish, poultry, etc. And that’s okay. But I also hate it.

      • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        23 days ago

        My mom often cooks “meat free”. There’s always some sausage in there like Chorizo. Tastes great, but it’s certainly not free of meat.

      • binarytobis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        23 days ago

        I’ve never once voiced this thought out loud, but every time someone says something like “I don’t want fish, I want to eat meat” I think “Well, you’re wrong, but OK.” There’s some arbitrary dividing line people assume is logical, but I don’t think it would hold up to serious scrutiny.

        • stray@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          “Organ meats” is definitely a phrase used for offal, but I think the “organ” qualifier is doing work there. Offal is certainly meat in the sense that if ordered a dish with no meat and got liver, I’d be upset. But I’d also be upset if I said I want meat for dinner and my partner made liver. I guess it really depends on context.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      23 days ago

      It’s wild to me… And then to get mad? Like “how dare you make me learn something”

      Proud ignorance is basically a religion in the US now.

    • 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 days ago

      This is how I felt as a kid when my peers insisted the thumb is not a finger. Like what are you talking about bro? If I asked before this came up, you’d have said you have ten fingers, not eight.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        23 days ago

        Of course there’s such a thing as a fish! A fish is any swimming vertebrate (or its descendant), such as a tuna, or a duck, or a human.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            22 days ago

            Nah, phylogenetically speaking, all descendants of fish must also be fish, by definition. Therefore, “being cold blooded” cannot also be a criterion (not that it would work anyway since tuna are warm blooded, BTW, and nobody would argue tuna aren’t fish).

            The “living wholly in water” criterion actually works, though: land-fish (e.g. humans) live inside a bag of water that we carry with us.

    • Gladaed@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      Ok, but you are wrong. While biology means animal is a member of animalia, people usually mean an animal that is capable of higher functions, e.g. a dog, sheep etc.

      Most fish don’t express themselves in an understandable way. Mussels barely have neurons.

      You gotta relax. Any sane human being should have clearly understood where they draw the line.

      You also do wrong stuff all the time because it is useful to be wrong.

      • stray@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        23 days ago

        I think you mean fish don’t express themselves in a way you understand. Some are lone hunters who have to rely on their wits to survive, while some have complex social interactions. Some even pass the mirror test.

        I don’t think you should make excuses for why some things deserve life or kindness and others don’t. I think it’s better to just be honest with yourself about your personal biases and say you like dogs too much to hurt them, but that you don’t care as much about fish.

      • thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        23 days ago

        I’ve only ever known Christians to think fish aren’t animals. I’m pretty sure that’s something random that the Vatican decided for bending lent rules or some shit.

        at least in my life most people do not have a “reasonably underseood line” where they arbitrarily stop considering animals as animals due to their perceived lack of communication. they have a line where they stop caring about them, but that’s usually about how cute they are, not about how they communicate. if more people understood koalas better they’d be way less popular. they barely have a brain, can’t communicate much, sound absolutely awful…

        most people just don’t actually think that much about it. trivia is for the people that do think about things. and it certainly should at least have its answers checked on google.

        • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          I’ve only ever known Christians to think fish aren’t animals. I’m pretty sure that’s something random that the Vatican decided for bending lent rules or some shit.

          iirc from a class I took 17 years ago (I probably don’t), that is essentially correct. I believe it was to help with getting Scandinavian and/or Baltic countries to convert to Christianity. At least that’s the gist of what I remember.

      • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        Fish just express themselves in a way different from mammals, and just as capable of ‘higher functions’ as any other animal. Also the fact that you mentioned mussels, which are molluscs, doesn’t exactly make you seem like an expert on the subject.

      • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        Nah buddy, we all went to school, and it’s abundantly clear that in modern English, an animal is part of the Kingdom Animalia.

        So, the only people (in the English speaking world) who don’t think of insects or fish an animals, either are of a much, much older generation, or didn’t do very well in school.

        Most fucking 6-year-olds, in Australia at least, would be able to answer yes to “is a fish an animal?”.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 days ago

        I don’t think people “usually” mean that at all. And even if they did, why would I care what people mean by it if it’s wrong?

  • mosspiglet@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    23 days ago

    When I was in third grade I had an argument with my teacher who told me that insects were not animals. I was really into nature documentaries and books at the time and I knew that insects were in the animal kingdom. I remember going home and being really mad about it. That really soured me on school for the rest of my life. I’m still bitter about it!

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      23 days ago

      I had a teacher in 6th grade who told us that God placed the earth the perfect distance from the Sun; a few inches closer and we’d all burn, and a few inches further and we’d all freeze. I got detention for standing on top of my desk and asking why I wasn’t on fire yet.

      That kinda shattered my view of teachers being arbiters of knowledge.

      • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        23 days ago

        Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, “This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!”

        - Douglas Adams

      • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        Also, that’s a specious argument because if the Earth wasn’t in the Goldilocks zone it would be a dead planet and we wouldn’t have evolved on it over billions of years to make the observation that it is the right distance from the Sun to harbour life.

    • Afaithfulnihilist@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 days ago

      Silimar, I had a teacher ask us to write down the first animal that came to mind and I wrote, “wolf spider” because to an 8 year old, there are few more bad ass sounding animals.

      She said “really? That’s the First animal you think of?” Eye roll

      Me: looks down at doodles of giant spiders battling tanks that shoot lightning, “it’s the only animal I’m thinking of right now…”

      • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        I guess compared to the other examples at least she didn’t try and persuade you it wasn’t an animal, just a bit crap at embracing a child’s natural enthusiasm and kind of immediately killing their sense of enquiry by making it in to an experience of being judged.

    • toynbee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      My third grade teacher told me that negative numbers aren’t real.

      Reflecting back on it thirty years later, it’s clear what she meant, but the poorly communicated statement and arguments she made were very upsetting to me, someone who at the time was very proud of having just learned the concept.

      In the moment, I had the same reaction as you. Shortly thereafter, my mom - who was not at all a fan of that teacher - took my brother and me out of public school and we started homeschool.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        23 days ago

        I really wish teachers understood that the correct response to that is “yes, but that’s something you’ll be learning later, for now we’re going to not deal with that.” That’s how my Jr high math teacher dealt with me forgetting algebra and attempting to invent calculus because the rate of change seemed the easiest solution to the problem.

        That said, I’ve met education students. You’ve got some bright people who really love kids or teaching, but you’ve got plenty of people who never really understood stem subjects. It was a revelation to learn that yeah a lot of grade school teachers don’t get math.

      • binarytobis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        23 days ago

        Sometimes teachers repeat a lesson plan over and over, and a small innocuous statement grows in intensity with each retelling and each argument with students as the teacher digs in their heels, until it’s ballooned into something silly. I’ve also heard that suction and centrifugal force are a myth.

        OK, I understand that you’re trying to make a point to better my understanding of the material you are currently teaching, but now I’m hung up on this weird thing you said. It usually comes down to something “the language to describe this thing is insufficient when expressed this way” but the way they say it is like “this concept is a lie, full stop, no more thinking.”

        Maybe they initially wanted to use more definitive statements to make students listen in class or something.

  • ieatpwns@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    23 days ago

    Correct me if I’m wrong but like isn’t every living thing an animal? Like trees and fungi too? Or is there something I’m missing?

    I was wrong yall

    • Ashen44@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      23 days ago

      Animals are one group or “kingdom” of life. Plants (such as trees) and fungi (such as mushrooms) each have their own kingdoms, and so do bacteria and a few other forms of life. They’re organized this way to represent how closely related they are. Every single living thing in the animal kingdom is more closely related to every single other thing in the animal kingdom than to anything in any other kingdom.

      As an example, chimpanzees, starfish, and earthworms are more closely related to each other than to a sunflower, so we call chimpanzees, starfish, and earthworms animals but not sunflowers. This is called “taxonomy” and there’s a ton of different levels of how related things are, ranging from very distantly related to so closely related you can barely tell them apart. Kingdom isn’t even the most broad!

      You might have also heard that fungi are more closely related to animals than to plants, but that doesn’t mean that fungi are animals, just that the lifeform that branched into fungi and animals did so a lot later than the one that branched into plants. In the end they’re still distinct enough that we call them different kingdoms!

    • This is where the Chinese Language comes to shine. Animal, 动物, literally “moving object”, so if it has roots (aka: plants, fungi), it cannot move on its own, therefore, not a 动物, Animal.

      Like the words are self-explanatory, so beautiful.

      (Please excuse me for interjecting my knowledge of the Chinese Language into everything lolz)

    • PyroVK@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      No trees are plants and fungi are fungi. Animals are multicellular organisms that are mobile and seek out food at a very basic description. Plants are multicellular non mobile that make their own food and fungi are somewhere between that. Closer to animals but not. Then there’s the single cell life of bacteria and archea.

      • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        Animals are multicellular organisms that are mobile and seek out food at a very basic description.

        Sea sponges are animals and don’t move.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          23 days ago

          Animals are a specific lineage of eukaryotic multicellular (mostly) organisms that lack cell walls.

          The problem with evolution is that it likes to make exceptions to any descriptor based taxonomy. Any taxonomic category will ultimately be attempting to say “this genetic lineage”. If a sea sponge species eventually develops chlorophyll and cell walls it’ll still be an animal, but just a really fucking confusing one.

          • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            22 days ago

            Yep, traditional (non-phylogenetic) taxonomy creates problems like protists, the grab bag of eukaryota.

            There are more species labeled protists than the sum of all their descendants.

            Are they animals, plants, or fungi? Sure, why not!

            Some are heterotrophs (eat things), some are autotrophs (energy from sun or chemicals), and others are mixotrophs (some of both). Some are motile, others immotile. Some are multicellular, most unicellular.

            The problem is all taxonomy is arbitrary, and traditional taxonomy is pretty inconsistent. Phylogenetic taxonomy is still arbitrary, but using evolutionary relationships instead of “this monkey looks like other monkey” at least gets you more consistency in that system.

  • InvalidName2@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 days ago

    I’m impressed how common these “sightings” are given how rare I would have assumed this type of person would be. But lo and behold…

    I was visiting the aquarium some years ago and there was an expert at one of the exhibits talking about “these animals this and these animals that” when suddenly I heard a woman who had several children with her exclaim “Fish are animals?”

    I don’t recall at the moment how the staff member responded, other than I remember being impressed because it was a very non-judgmental and informative reply to her.

    Admittedly, my partner in crime and I were struggling with the darker elements of our animal nature – beet red from holding back our laughter and our eyes-only conversation wasn’t helping.

    • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 days ago

      Guess that dealing with public in that context everyday ot would be a common occurece and they already have a easy non judgmental answer for that

  • I think language plays a factor in how you think.

    When I think of the English word “Animal”, I think of a picture of a deer or a cow in a textbook. When I think in Chinese, 动物, I extrapolate the meaning of the word, 动 which means “moving”, and 物 meaning “object”, 动物 = “moving object”, so its easy to know what is and isn’t a 动物 (animal), the word is self-explanatory.

    • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      A lot of words in English are based on similar patterns, with roots in Latin or Greek. “Animal” isn’t a compound example like 动物, but it does have a root in the Latin “anima”, which has more of a spiritual basis.

      The English word “animal” derives from the Latin word animale, a neuter form of the adjective animalis. The ultimate root of the word is the Latin noun anima, meaning “breath,” “soul,” or “vital principle”.

      The etymology traces the concept of an “animal” back to the essential quality of having life, specifically the presence of breath or a soul that distinguishes a living being from an inanimate object.

      Arguably also a little bit outdated, considering the discovery of phosphorous in pee and how it proved there was nothing fundamentally different about matter in living beings vs matter in inanimate objects.

      Effectively both have more or less the same meaning, considering ‘anima’ is the same root for animate.

      • Tbf, when they coined those terms, they probably haven’t discovered like most of the variety of species yet, but that was the best term they had at the time.

        Edit: Also: Venus Fly Trap does not have legs to move. It technically does move, but it’s still pretty much stationary relative to the ground. the 植 in 植物 (plants) basiclly includes the character 植, meaning “to plant”/“to establish”, so anything within the 植物 category cannot relocate itself (excluding via reproduction, spreading seeds, which doesn’t count for this purpose).

        Also, doesn’t sea cucumbers move? I mean, snails are animals, theres no confusion about that lol.

  • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    22 days ago

    Actually, this is how I look at people who think stating that insects are animals makes them big brains… Its right up there, with “Spiders arent incests because they have 8 legs.” or “The sun is actually a star!” or “America is actually a continent”. Its always the most basic of shit that people who try to make others feel small use during these annoying conversations.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      Lots of people think that animal means mammal. They are animals, but they are not mammals.

      • ganryuu@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        I mean, yeah, government drones are not animals, I don’t see the problem here.

  • The Psyace Affect@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    You think these people know biology nowadays? Come on now, look around you. If anything, they’re trying to get rid of biology courses in schools

  • Kurroth@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Can someone explain the memes template/what it is trying to convey.

    I get the text, but I am unfamiliar with the meme and what the face it meant to be portraying.