Yes this! I hate when people say biology supports their trans/homo/ect. phobia when in reality it absolutely does not
Transphobic people must really hate frogs.
And many kinds of fish! Like clown fish : ]
I am trans and love toads
Which doesn’t prove the above statement but it hints towards it.
How do you feel about trans fish?
Edit el
Especially the gay ones.
I think those are called amfibiphobes
i don’t think transphobes are educated enough to know frog biology. and if they are they suffer from a “humans are not animals” kind of mentality and put humanity on a pedestal of not being like the other
girlsliving beings on this planetWe aren’t like other animals though, we are the top species when it comes to resource usage and waste per capita!
It’s 1st grade biology!
Yes, it is. Advertising the fact that you only know biology up to a 1st grade level is not the flex you think it is.
It’s likely easier for people to learn to love trans people than understand there are no fish… If that tells you anything.
Gender: fish
Is that you, Gil?
Is that you, Mr. Limpet?
Nice to meet you, MrMcLure
I prefer smizmar
Fish absolutely exist cladistically, OP just didn’t want to admit they’re a land dwelling fish. You believe the implications of cladistics or you don’t, cowards.
I’d also argue it’s relatively easy to separate fish-fish from land fish from land fish that became sea fish again to bully the fish fish.
Is fish just another name for vertebrates ?
Nah. You could have a fish that evolved out of having a spine (see: Chuck Schumer) but you can’t evolve out of a clade.
Seems so. Wikipedia tells there are seven classes of vertebrates:
- Agnatha (jawless fishes, paraphyletic)
- Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous fishes)
- Osteichthyes (bony fishes, paraphyletic)
- Amphibia (amphibians)
- Reptilia (reptiles, paraphyletic)
- Aves (birds)
- Mammalia (mammals)
So yes, fishes is the same thing as vertebrates.
Probably because if you were a vertebrate living in the sea, you needed some sort of gills and fins and such. And those are what makes people assume something is a “fish”.
You sound exactly like a specimen from the Dunning-Krueger clade
I’m not gonna lie man this one sounded better in your head
Considering that you misspelled the name of a common term and that’s not a biological classification I’m going to stand by what the doctorates who taught my zoology courses said.
Just gonna swing by and drop this little grenade:
If you believe “race doesn’t exist”, then this post also applies to you. If you can refer to different genders while also understanding that at the individual level definitions are fluid and blurry, then you can refer to different races while also understanding that at the individual level definitions are fluid and blurry.
Got it, fish are racist confirmed.
Of course some fish are racist, especially humans.
We’re all just collectively ignoring the biologist’s username?
I mean they are definitely correct, but that name detracts from their credibility somewhat.
That’s a problem for the future society
What’s the worst an evil biologist can do? Dissect a frog, but with a frown?
Evil biologists might turn to galvanism to animate dead creatures
I’m not afraid of religious people, doesn’t matter whether they’re protestant or catholic.
You hire them as henchmen in Evil Genius and Evil Genius 2. They are a bit buggy though and sometimes forget where their whiteboards are.
Pizza is a vegetable
Things a Republican Congress will vote for are crazy man
Bees are fish.
(in California)
“Gender is absolutely the same way.” - from How to Start a Vicious Online Argument
Honestly I sometimes feel like going to certain online communities and just making a single post that says “gender” and then vanishing and watching the ensuing arguments.
They called him “The Sniper”. He would strike without warning, always vanishing into the ether. No downvote could stop him. No harsh rebuke could change his merciless ways.
I was going to say ‘how about bony fish?’, but then I checked and I am technically a bony fish (Osteichthyes).
Regarding “fish” Old classification relied on “phenotype” characteristics. And yes lamprey, a shark or a cod has little in common genetically. But they still share some common traits that distinguishes them considerably from whales, sea lions and seals. I still think the term “fish” is useful, and modern classifications rely more on genetics so I would say that the argument is semi void.
They didn’t say that fish wasn’t a useful concept, they said that the more you delve into the facts, the less certain you can be that it has a definite meaning that can be pinned down scientifically.
People think the science agrees with them that the world can be divided into fish and not fish, but that’s absolutely not what the science is saying, and their understanding is superficial.
Similarly, the terms male and female are generally quite useful, but the people who think that there’s some kind of scientific and absolute binary distinction between them are just incorrect, and their understanding is superficial.
I mean there are lots of differences between male and female.
In the same way, there are lots of differences between fish and non fish.
actually no such thing as fish
ELI22 undergrad degree?
When organizing the big family tree of everything that’s alive, you use clades, which means a group that all of the individuals in it have the same common ancestor. E.g. All vertebrates, wether mammals, reptiles, etc, have the same vertebrate ancestor. Mammals also share the same tetrapod ancestor, so they’re all tetrapods.
Fish doesn’t work like that, because we don’t count all the its ancestors as fish (tetrapods have a common bony fish ancestor, for example, but you wouldn’t call a parrot a fish). But you know what a fish is. We call this a paraphyletic group.
Whales are fish, fite me
The only land animals that aren’t fish are animals with exoskeletons. Whales are fish just as much as you and me are. And we are fish :)
Thank you for agreeing with me, but I specifically asked for a fight
You’ll never get that from me!
Gruahahahhaaaaa!
Best I can do is fish.
“What is a Fish?” coming soon
deleted by creator
Slightly off-topic from the intended point, but I’ve heard this more often, that there’s no such thing as a fish, but it’s a useful constructed concept to have.
So why is it so important that we all remember that animals like whales are not fish, they’re mammals? Didn’t stop us from calling animals from other groups fish, why should mammals get a special treatment?
Because mammals got those mammaries. So deeply rooted that humans can’t stop putting them even on non-mammals when we want to anthropomorphise in stories, myths and art
The point is to emphasize that whales biologies are significantly different from other similar-looking things, not technicalities about which named group they belong to.
