You must log in or register to comment.
And I’m a fish. But that’s not very helpful.
Rimmer was right!
No such things as trees either…
This is the one that breaks my brain
Believing people who say that sort of thing about the meaning of perfectly cromulent words like “fish”, “bird”, and “berry” is like going to the butcher shop to learn about horsemanship.
Nuts!
Some dinosaurs were fish. Therefore you’re a dinosaur.
Technically? All dinosaurs are fish. You are a fish. But you are not a dinosaur.
Well, neither option is helpful.
I’m going with “dinosaurs are dinosaurs!”
Now that’s just silly.
my dinosaur has feathers, does that help?
Awww! That’s a cute fish you got there!
So sigma.
Behold! A man!
Wait, but didn’t a lot of them it turns out actually have feathers? Like regardless of taxonomy, with regards to phenotype, I thought we were able to inductively reason they had feathers ( possibly more like like down feathers ) and were even most closely related to birds.
Yes, we have proof for quite a number and can conclude that there were even more, nobody really knows how many. Some go so far to speculate that all did.
I think the meme is that the guy on the right sees it with phylogenetic lense and would also include birds into the reptilian group. I’m more fan of saying there are no reptiles at all but both views are equally valid
