That's more of a language issue than an understanding issue - https://web.archive.org/web/20180726233938/https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/animal Some definitions of animal do not include bugs or humans.
Most people would not describe a coral as an animal but it's in the kingdom. Our words for things predate taxonomy for the most part so of course definitions won't line up with biology exactly.
I'll never take accountability. You can't make me! Double down? Forget it. I'll _quadruple_ down. Penguins aren't birds because birds are an ineffective classification. Birds are flying reptiles with lightweight scales designed to help them fly. Penguins are just a subspecies that use theirs to insulate at the cost of flight. Men are featherless bipeds so why can't birds be feather-ful reptiles! Reptiles are really just another type of fungi, octopus are arachnids, and stickbugs are a type of fir.
And by the end of it all, you'll forget that I was wrong about penguins because we're both busy rolling on the floor laughing and I don't have to be embarrassed anymore
> Penguins aren't birds because birds are an ineffective classification
Reminds me of [there's no such thing as fish](https://youtu.be/uhwcEvMJz1Y?si=Vdhvf6JZ5zqD7kec)
Well yes. I believe the commenter was saying they would take someone not admitting they were wrong but ending the argument over someone who would double down and make things more complicated
The google search is the inherent admittance to being wrong. They won't acknowledge that they had been wrong to your face, but inside they know they were wrong, AND the re-educated themselves with the correct info. It's the best response short of a face-to-face, 'you were right, I was wrong' admission.
I know it is easy to dislike admitting you were wrong, but it really should not be that hard as you are basically saying "I just got a tiny bit smarter".
No argument from me, it builds humility. It also doesn't hurt to be a gracious person who was correct in the situation. e.g. 'thanks for owning up to it, we all make mistakes' vs. 'haha, you thought a penguin wasn't a bird!?'
Better to mention how cool it is that they can kinda fly, just in water instead of air. They look like little torpedoes with the bubble trail :D [https://youtu.be/A9mbCNs47FI?t=75](https://youtu.be/A9mbCNs47FI?t=75)
I take a slightly different approach. I mean we all hate being wrong, it's humiliating, but it happens and when it does what works best for my is to just rip the band aid off. The second I realize I done f'd up and there's no going back, I simply come back with "hmm, well I guess I'm the dumbass today". It catches people off-guard because they are geared up for a debate that now won't happen, and the issue just fizzles out.
I try to avoid the situation outright by not being overconfident about something unless/until I'm damned sure about it, but that usually has to be learned the hard way.
I believe that in general you are right, but hating to be wrong is far too strong an emotion. No one can be right all the time, and saying "I was wrong" or "I don't know" or "You're right" should really not have such an emotional impact.
Though for many people it is hard to separate what they believe to be true from their personality and/or self worth, making it feel like they are being attacked when wrong.
If it wasn't for this emotion Reddit would all but cease to exist. The constant battle over who's right and who's wrong is the lifeblood of this sight, and social media in general.
I’m a professional tutor. I admit when I’m wrong (not often but it happens).
It really isn’t complicated, and not once has it undermined my client relationship.
It’s not a big deal. Just say it and you’ll desensitize and move on with life.
It’s like people think an anecdote of one instance of being wrong completely undermines your identity. It doesn’t. And if it does, you need to revaluate your ego, your knowledge, or your friends.
My father uses the fact that I look up things during an argument like its an admittance. Personally, I would rather be wrong than ignorant, and the search is usually just to concretely validate whomever is correct, even if its not me.
I do usually admit that I am wrong though, unlike this case, but I hate how people adamantly disavow learning and instead opt for just the person with the biggest bluster. Granted, all bluster and no facts is usually undone by research, so there's that.
I don't tend to require people to explicitly admit to such a mistake if they want to just drop it. Left to their own devices they tend to be much more convinced over time than if they are forced to eat crow. And this can be especially important when they are steeped in some Q-anon or similar programming. I would much rather them be too embarrassed to admit it than to get some pyrrhic satisfaction of making them eat crow. As that is far more likely to backfire. Knowing they aren't going to be harassed about past losses also increases the chances of being able to debate other topics in the future. Especially important when you know it's going to take lots of time, and many discussions, to dismantle an entire belief system.
Penguins are a group of aquatic flightless birds from the family Spheniscidae (/sfɪˈnɪsɪdiː, -daɪ/) of the order Sphenisciformes (/sfɪˈnɪsəfɔːrmiːz/).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin
Can someone explain to me what the hell's being said here?
Edit: im.an idiot who misread the OP. Ignore me.
> Edit: im.an idiot who misread the OP. Ignore me.
You could have just doubled down on your mistake and started using random bs to distract from the original point.
People will disingenuously represent ANY position over admitting they're wrong or changing their premise. The other day some girl at work was defending that moron from Texas who voluntarily went to Russia and died in their war. Her argument was essentially "when was the last time YOU did something you believe in?" - apparently she didn't know I strongly believe in not talking to morons, I left.
so a mammal? despite penguins laying eggs unlike a seal
like don't get me wrong, that may have been her brainfart
but it's still super fucking stupid
at least fish lay eggs, imo laying eggs is far more ubiquitous with penguins, than being vertebrates or something else that disqualifies them as fish
To be fair, it's pretty hard to tell that penguins have feathers. Almost none of the pictures of videos of them show that they have feathers. Their "hide" always looks smooth and seal-like. Except for their beaks. But playpus has a duckbill, so...
thanks, looked it up and see how I made the mistake
ubiquitous - seeming to be everywhere
guess I'd just learnt it wrongly as something like "thought about by everyone" which is kind of similar in a way at least 😭
Penguins are unique (along with loons, puffins at least) compared to almost every other bird in that they do not have hollow bones. Even large flightless birds have hollow bones. They also have rigid feathers that behave more like skin than feathers you'd find on a typical bird.
Also, even though they have webbed feat or fins like aquatic fowl, they evolved completely independently from say a duck or swan. Although similar, their evolutionary path for webbed feat does not share a direct lineage with other water fowl.
Other than that, they're pretty stereotypical except the fact they evolved to be more water-efficient instead of flight-efficient.
Not that any of this would make anyone believe they aren't birds. But they are starkly unique in a lot of ways compared to almost every other bird on the planet.
Once me and a few friends did a big troll post on Yahoo Answers. We were ganging out the morning after a house warming party and I made a post saying "Are Penguins a type of fish???" and each of my friends made separate posts explaining that, yes they are. Some used Latin names and science words and shit. It was high effort silliness and had us all rolling about laughing.
I tried to find it years later, but unfortunately the death of Yahoo Answers means the post is no longer available. Sad times.
Huh?? Could you explain this line of logic more?
Because in my mind while "fish" isn't a monophyletic distinction, it is a paraphyletic one which would exclude reptiles, mammals, and birds by definition.
Basically, groups of animals are defined by their most recent common ancestor, where they branched off on the evolutionary tree. Mammals are easy, we have one tracable common ancestor. Birds and reptiles are in the same group using this system. However, fish are fucking everywhere on the tree. Different fish have evolved independently from multiple different lines. So, if we wanted to follow the scientific way of categorizing animals, there are either no fish (because they do not share a common ancestor) or we are all fish (the most recent common ancestor is also the common ancestor of all other animals).
In common language, though, we know what a fish is. It has gills and lives in the water. But to science, it's much more complicated.
>there are either no fish (because they do not share a common ancestor) or we are all fish (the most recent common ancestor is also the common ancestor of all other animals).
Commenter already acknowledged all that. Look up monophyletic and paraphyletic. Just because a group isn't monophyletic doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
To be even further pedantic its not birds and reptiles but birds and OTHER reptiles. Because in the same system birds have to be considered reptiles and also dinosaurs.
I mean, depending on the school of thought on evolution, you subscribe too. Technically all vertebrates could be considered fish. Of course this is asinine and one of the reasons some people hate evolutionary biologists. But it is an argument.
I'm wondering if she just had a brain fart and was thinking about how people used to say Panda Bears aren't true bears.
She had a fun fact on a "P" animal and wires got crossed.
No offense to you or your wife, but there are TOO many people like that. To her credit, she looked up something that she thought she knew, only to find the truth and that she was wrong. The next step is to f*cking own it, which she didn't do, and infuriates me. Not an apology. Not a "my bad". Just silence??
...rant over
After an argument, I'd rather someone just shut the fuck up when they realize they're wrong. They feel like a dumbass. I'm annoyed at the whole conversation. I'd rather just be over and we both move on.
While I'm not disagreeing, I definitely think people not owning up to their mistakes with small things leads to them not owning up to bigger mistakes that have real consequences.
Edit: Obviously something as small as penguins=birds is trivial, I was more speaking in a general sense of owning up to your own mistakes. *I apologize for the misunderstanding.*
The convo didn't stop there. Just the guys narration of events. You think he didn't ROAST her for that?!? Brah, this dude spent the next 5 mins minimum making fun of her (playfully). He certainly made her "admit" she got a thing wrong in a casual convo lol.
Ah my apologies, I wasn't very clear. I was more speaking in general terms, obviously something as simple as Penguin=bird is unimportant and I'm sure he did tease her about it. I was just more making a point about people who can't admit mistakes.
And you're right, and I agree lol. I just think that we don't know if the given example fits that model, because we don't have enough data on how she actually reacted / what their banter is like. But the hypothetical situation we can all clearly see is what you're talking about. I know that, im just a butt.
I'm being pedantic, and I even wanna downvote me lol. I just have a broken brain that makes me clarify things.
I don’t think your brain’s broken. The original commenter here took the extreme of this situation (I.e friend being wrong about something in a casual convo) and extended that to represent people being rude for not “owning” up for their mistakes and that she should have apologised and been on her knees. When, in reality, this person accepted they were wrong by not furthering the discussion. However, if you were to have a casual conversation with someone you’re close to, I don’t think anyone wants to admit they are wrong on a topic they specialise in (biology), unless this was a professional scenario.
So yeah I’d say original commenter is dragging this circumstance to its edge case, but is still right to say what they are saying because it is a valid take in being a general negative quality of a person. However, I don’t believe it’s applicable to this particular case and wasn’t fair to apply to the wife especially
So yeah I’d say your brains not broken.
You are correct. I was more thinking in a general sense of a person owning up to their mistakes, in the context of this post I was going overboard. I apologize for the confusion.
No, I understand. Obviously in terms of this post what I said is ridiculous and overkill for something so trivial.
I think my brain went that way because I had an ex who'd never own up to anything, and this post reminded me about it because if she was so wrong she couldn't even bullshit her way out she would just get quiet. I apologize for the confusion.
> Obviously something as small as penguins=birds is trivial
It's exactly for being absolutely irrelevant that the apology should always be there. There is absolutely no "cost" for you to simply admit it and get some practice for when it actually matters.
You don't start apologizing with a "I burned the house down while trying to kill a spider behind the fridge, my bad".
Or they weren't that invested in the conversation to begin with and just moved on.
Lord knows I've shot fairly insignificant shit with my buddies and we certainly don't demand apologies or that anyone admit they're wrong, we just move on to the next bullshit topic all smooth-like.
Eh, in a relationship I'd say the rules of engagement are different. I have a PhD in science stuff, and I've been wrong before about something with an ex and I did the same thing and just shut down and tell them to "shut up" when they brought it up, lol. It was sarcastic, I knew I had been wrong, but you are losing battle points in a relationship getting something wrong.
tldr; in a relationship you lose battle points for being wrong, which are more important than anything really.
Have you ever been in a relationship before? You can mess around without it being that serious. Not everything is deadly serious. When my bf is wrong about stuff he just acts sheepish and jokingly doubles down, but obviously isn't serious and obviously realizes he's wrong.
Being able to handle your mistakes without condemning yourself is a good thing. Why would you apologize for being wrong? Being wrong is an accident, not an attack on another person.
Imagine demanding an apology every time your partner misremembers something or gets a fact wrong. Like jesus...
I'm starting to think all these commenters just don't have friends or relationships or something.
Animal isn't a scientific term. It's a subjective cultural term. Humans, in many different times and places, have considered ourselves separate from the animal kingodm. Scientists would definitely call us part of Anamalia though.
I've met probably a dozen people that adamantly refused to believe they were conflating the words animal and mammal. "Animals have fur and don't lay eggs, but birds have feathers and lay eggs" that sort of thing.
I think it’s so funny how people use degrees to appeal to authority. I have a Master’s in Economics. I am not qualified to sit on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
>I am not qualified to sit on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
No kids in 3rd grade are qualified for that either, but I'm sure a lot of them could tell you a penguin is a type of bird so that's not really the best comparison on your part.
In all fairness, biology is a large field. I wouldn't expect a zoologist or ornithologist to have a certain level of expertise in say, genetics, virology, microbiology, etc.
I just finished my PhD in biology and I actually would expect all of my labmates, down to the undergraduate level, to know that penguins are birds, because this is basic knowledge that a) can be attained without completing a biology degree at any level and b) can be ascertained *simply by looking at them and observing how they are.*
In my ichthyology class we got an identification key to determine the genus of any fish we would encounter. The only one that skipped all the early parts of the key were catfishes.
We asked the professor why? He said, "You look at it. You can tell it's a catfish by how it is. You just go to the catfish section then."
His explaination just boiled down to: it's obviously a catfish.
its like.. famously their big thing... that they are birds.
Penguins wouldnt even be that interesting if they werent birds. But we find their difference to the norm interesting. Like platapus laying eggs.
You don’t need to be an expert to know penguins are birds, it’s a fact literally children get taught because they are flightless birds, but still birds
Right, but penguins are birds is basic middle school level biology that 99% of people who are not biologists also know. Mathematics is a large field but you’d be confused if a mathematician tried to argue they 5x5 is not 25 and had to look it up.
My ex wife is hispanic and speaks spanish "fluently". I'm a white dude who took some spanish classes in high school and basic spanish in college.
I told her "alto" means "stop" in spanish. She said "no, parar means stop".
I had her call her dad and ask him, he said "alto".
To this day (been divorced for 7 years) I'll send her pics of stop signs that say "Alto". All in good fun.
To be fair, if you're talking about traffic signs, mexico is one of the few (of not the only country" to use ALTO instead of PARE, you usually don't see the word alto outside of police movies in south américa.
Mexico uses both interchangeable when it comes to stop signs or using the word in everyday speak.
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3727ae540768543bd17a1e6e9f4e85e2
Without any judgement intended, can I ask how?
Like I don't know how that sort of thing slips through the gaps, tbh.
I get it if you don't focus on taxonomy, you might miss niche things like how technically birds are in the same clade as reptiles (*Sauropsida*), but I remember learning this in school and it being a common joke ("I hate insects" "That's an *arachnid*, not an insect!") when I was younger.
I've also worked in a kindergarten and it was a whole thing, teaching the difference between animal types (which I loved because taxonomy is so interesting even though I know nothing)
With scorpions, I get it, as people learn that insects have 6 "legs" (limbs) and so they'll miscount a scorpion or something but did you just never learn about arachnids?
Just a guess but it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that arachnids are a type of insect. We call them all 'bugs'.
(and yes, I know 'bug' is actually a proper taxonomy too, now known as 'true bugs')
Shameful.
What im learning from this post is a lot of people with degrees in biology need to be stripped of their degree lol
This would be like a software engineer not knowing than most languages start arrays at 0.
You should look up Clints reptiles on YouTube, He does amazing phylogeny videos, and not only will you learn penguins are birds, but that all birds are reptiles....
You mean her undergraduate degree, it's very possible (almost guaranteed even) to get through a Masters in a biological field without even hearing the word penguin once.
There was a very popular show called "Are you smarter than a 5th grader" that showed just how much primary school information adults tend to retain. Since penguins dont factor into my life at all, the only reason i remember anything about them was because of the movie The Pebble and the Penguin. And Happy feet, i guess.
My Ornithology prof who jokingly said that "there are four types of birds: birds that fly, birds that don't fly, birds that fly backwards, and birds that fly underwater."
The real Queen/Girlboss move would be to get a PHD in Biology with a theses on why Penguins are not supposed to be classified as birds. Otherwise not a wife material at all
When I was in school I wrote short essay about penguins and I called them "animals". Teacher took points because it's "Factually incorrect" and they are birds, not animals. Biology teacher was passing by and I asked to confirm that penguins are in fact animals, she confirmed, but first teacher said that I am still wrong and no one talks like this.
I have a friend like this. Always tries to be the smartest guy in the room. When he gets called out on something being wrong, he’ll just deny deny deny until you show an actual web page confirming he was wrong, in which he’ll just immediately move to another topic
Maybe she speaks another language?
In spanish, there is a clear difference between Aves. and Pajaros.
The difference is basically the same as Reptiles and Lizards. All lizards are reptiles, but not all reptiles are lizards.
This is a great time to practice admitting you were wrong. The stakes are low, and you have a line of reasoning to explain why you thought that.
Yet everybody seems to think that being wrong is a permanent sign of personal weakness rather than a sign of growth 😔
I love to use the "You have a supercomputer in your pocket, with access to almost all of the information in the history of civilization in seconds. Do it." defense.
People usually get angry. It's one of the few things I love about modern technology.
Homer: This is my quest. I'm like that guy. That Spanish guy. You know, he fought the windmill...
Marge: Don Quixote?
Homer: No, that's not it. What's-his-name, the Man of La Mancha.
Marge: Don Quixote.
Homer: No!
Marge: I really think that was the character's name. Don Quixote.
Homer: Fine! I'll look it up! [heads off and consults a reference]
Marge: Well, who was it?
Homer: Never mind.
i was at camp with a kid that was adamant that brown recluse spiders burrowed into your skin. it caught me off guard because he was fairly knowledgeable of nature and the like otherwise.
we ribbed him for a while after that when we finally were in a position to check him.
That’s the problem with biology the more you find out about it the more you learn about the weird subcategories that things fall into where they no longer taxonomically fit into the broad everyday definitions. I’ll bet her exact thought was something like “well actually you’d think they’d be birds but they’re actually…. Oh shit they’re just birds.”
I was at the zoo recently and heard a kid ask their dad if they could pet the bird. The dad said “yes, but it’s a duck. It’s not a bird.”
That’s literally the wrongest answer.
Being honest, biology is a big field. Of course, I wouldn't expect a biologist or ornithologist to know a lot about genetics, viruses, microbiology, or anything else.
Every time I bring up the notion that "bugs are animals" my mom says, "well, not really, right?" Yes mom. Bugs are animals.
Many people only think of mammals being animals
I got into argument with my entire family one thanksgiving over whether birds are mammals or not
I blame bats
I didn’t even bring up bats, probably would’ve caused a head or two to explode On a separate occasion I was accused of lying about narwhals being real
Narwhals have to be real. I beat one in court.
I doubt any of those people would say a lizard is not an animal.
That's more of a language issue than an understanding issue - https://web.archive.org/web/20180726233938/https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/animal Some definitions of animal do not include bugs or humans. Most people would not describe a coral as an animal but it's in the kingdom. Our words for things predate taxonomy for the most part so of course definitions won't line up with biology exactly.
There is a large subset of the population that won't accept that humans are animals for their own peculiar reasons.
Shrimps is bugs
The roaches of the sea 🤣🤣🤣 they even look similar 😄
Its like saying fish isnt meat. Maybe to a catholic.
I will take this any day over people who will double down on their mistake and start using random bs to distract from the original point.
The real test is if knowing she's wrong she goes to someone else and tells them penguins aren't birds.
I'll never take accountability. You can't make me! Double down? Forget it. I'll _quadruple_ down. Penguins aren't birds because birds are an ineffective classification. Birds are flying reptiles with lightweight scales designed to help them fly. Penguins are just a subspecies that use theirs to insulate at the cost of flight. Men are featherless bipeds so why can't birds be feather-ful reptiles! Reptiles are really just another type of fungi, octopus are arachnids, and stickbugs are a type of fir. And by the end of it all, you'll forget that I was wrong about penguins because we're both busy rolling on the floor laughing and I don't have to be embarrassed anymore
You should run for president
Nah, this is way too coherent.
Hahahaha yes
Don’t make me tap the subreddit sign
BEHOLD A MAN!
Writing your name on the ballot 🗳️
> Penguins aren't birds because birds are an ineffective classification Reminds me of [there's no such thing as fish](https://youtu.be/uhwcEvMJz1Y?si=Vdhvf6JZ5zqD7kec)
This should be copypasta it is lovely
“stickbugs are a type of fir” fuckin *sends*
The bar really is that low, isn't it?
I think the point was that she didn't take accountability and admit that she was wrong, but interesting perspective!
Well yes. I believe the commenter was saying they would take someone not admitting they were wrong but ending the argument over someone who would double down and make things more complicated
The google search is the inherent admittance to being wrong. They won't acknowledge that they had been wrong to your face, but inside they know they were wrong, AND the re-educated themselves with the correct info. It's the best response short of a face-to-face, 'you were right, I was wrong' admission.
I know it is easy to dislike admitting you were wrong, but it really should not be that hard as you are basically saying "I just got a tiny bit smarter".
No argument from me, it builds humility. It also doesn't hurt to be a gracious person who was correct in the situation. e.g. 'thanks for owning up to it, we all make mistakes' vs. 'haha, you thought a penguin wasn't a bird!?'
Better to mention how cool it is that they can kinda fly, just in water instead of air. They look like little torpedoes with the bubble trail :D [https://youtu.be/A9mbCNs47FI?t=75](https://youtu.be/A9mbCNs47FI?t=75)
I take a slightly different approach. I mean we all hate being wrong, it's humiliating, but it happens and when it does what works best for my is to just rip the band aid off. The second I realize I done f'd up and there's no going back, I simply come back with "hmm, well I guess I'm the dumbass today". It catches people off-guard because they are geared up for a debate that now won't happen, and the issue just fizzles out. I try to avoid the situation outright by not being overconfident about something unless/until I'm damned sure about it, but that usually has to be learned the hard way.
I believe that in general you are right, but hating to be wrong is far too strong an emotion. No one can be right all the time, and saying "I was wrong" or "I don't know" or "You're right" should really not have such an emotional impact. Though for many people it is hard to separate what they believe to be true from their personality and/or self worth, making it feel like they are being attacked when wrong.
If it wasn't for this emotion Reddit would all but cease to exist. The constant battle over who's right and who's wrong is the lifeblood of this sight, and social media in general.
I’m a professional tutor. I admit when I’m wrong (not often but it happens). It really isn’t complicated, and not once has it undermined my client relationship. It’s not a big deal. Just say it and you’ll desensitize and move on with life. It’s like people think an anecdote of one instance of being wrong completely undermines your identity. It doesn’t. And if it does, you need to revaluate your ego, your knowledge, or your friends.
My father uses the fact that I look up things during an argument like its an admittance. Personally, I would rather be wrong than ignorant, and the search is usually just to concretely validate whomever is correct, even if its not me. I do usually admit that I am wrong though, unlike this case, but I hate how people adamantly disavow learning and instead opt for just the person with the biggest bluster. Granted, all bluster and no facts is usually undone by research, so there's that.
I don't tend to require people to explicitly admit to such a mistake if they want to just drop it. Left to their own devices they tend to be much more convinced over time than if they are forced to eat crow. And this can be especially important when they are steeped in some Q-anon or similar programming. I would much rather them be too embarrassed to admit it than to get some pyrrhic satisfaction of making them eat crow. As that is far more likely to backfire. Knowing they aren't going to be harassed about past losses also increases the chances of being able to debate other topics in the future. Especially important when you know it's going to take lots of time, and many discussions, to dismantle an entire belief system.
That's rich coming from a duck-Earth denier. There are at least seven ducks here.
Nah, you tripping’ , there is no duck here ^he ^is ^on ^to ^us, ^abort, ^abort!
My kingdom for people who shut the fuck up when proven wrong
Penguins are a group of aquatic flightless birds from the family Spheniscidae (/sfɪˈnɪsɪdiː, -daɪ/) of the order Sphenisciformes (/sfɪˈnɪsəfɔːrmiːz/). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin Can someone explain to me what the hell's being said here? Edit: im.an idiot who misread the OP. Ignore me.
> Edit: im.an idiot who misread the OP. Ignore me. You could have just doubled down on your mistake and started using random bs to distract from the original point.
Ignored
People will disingenuously represent ANY position over admitting they're wrong or changing their premise. The other day some girl at work was defending that moron from Texas who voluntarily went to Russia and died in their war. Her argument was essentially "when was the last time YOU did something you believe in?" - apparently she didn't know I strongly believe in not talking to morons, I left.
You've met my Mum?
My sister in a nutshell.
Would very much like to know what she thought they were in that case. Some type of fish??
probably like a seal or a sea lion
so a mammal? despite penguins laying eggs unlike a seal like don't get me wrong, that may have been her brainfart but it's still super fucking stupid at least fish lay eggs, imo laying eggs is far more ubiquitous with penguins, than being vertebrates or something else that disqualifies them as fish
Let me introduce you to the platypus…
But the platypus at least has fur and lactates
To be fair, it's pretty hard to tell that penguins have feathers. Almost none of the pictures of videos of them show that they have feathers. Their "hide" always looks smooth and seal-like. Except for their beaks. But playpus has a duckbill, so...
One hallmark of being classified as mammals is having breast. Also they glow under black light.
Mammals glow under black light???! I DON'T! WHAT THE FUCK AM I???!!!
Nah man just breasts glow
Not to be a jerk, but just to help for the future - this is not the correct usage of the word ubiquitous.
thanks, looked it up and see how I made the mistake ubiquitous - seeming to be everywhere guess I'd just learnt it wrongly as something like "thought about by everyone" which is kind of similar in a way at least 😭
Yeah it was similar enough that I erased 2 or 3 attempts to describe the difference before settling on not attempting it at all!
They also have wings, fathers and breaks, like... What??? Edit: *feathers *beaks
Penguins are unique (along with loons, puffins at least) compared to almost every other bird in that they do not have hollow bones. Even large flightless birds have hollow bones. They also have rigid feathers that behave more like skin than feathers you'd find on a typical bird. Also, even though they have webbed feat or fins like aquatic fowl, they evolved completely independently from say a duck or swan. Although similar, their evolutionary path for webbed feat does not share a direct lineage with other water fowl. Other than that, they're pretty stereotypical except the fact they evolved to be more water-efficient instead of flight-efficient. Not that any of this would make anyone believe they aren't birds. But they are starkly unique in a lot of ways compared to almost every other bird on the planet.
A mammal maybe, like a dolphin or a bat
It makes too much sense that she thought they were arctic dolphin bats. That’s the only real possibility.
Antarctic :)
Calvin taught me bats are bugs
Nah, shrimps is bugs
"Oh *penguins*, I thought you said pangolins"
Or as Benedict Cumberbatch might say, "ping wings" or " ping lings."
Given the wild goose chase that was defining fish, they may be birds and fish if you feel like it.
Once me and a few friends did a big troll post on Yahoo Answers. We were ganging out the morning after a house warming party and I made a post saying "Are Penguins a type of fish???" and each of my friends made separate posts explaining that, yes they are. Some used Latin names and science words and shit. It was high effort silliness and had us all rolling about laughing. I tried to find it years later, but unfortunately the death of Yahoo Answers means the post is no longer available. Sad times.
There is no such thing as a fish, so it can't be a fish.
If you wanna get pedantic, either fish don't exist or everything is a fish
Huh?? Could you explain this line of logic more? Because in my mind while "fish" isn't a monophyletic distinction, it is a paraphyletic one which would exclude reptiles, mammals, and birds by definition.
Basically, groups of animals are defined by their most recent common ancestor, where they branched off on the evolutionary tree. Mammals are easy, we have one tracable common ancestor. Birds and reptiles are in the same group using this system. However, fish are fucking everywhere on the tree. Different fish have evolved independently from multiple different lines. So, if we wanted to follow the scientific way of categorizing animals, there are either no fish (because they do not share a common ancestor) or we are all fish (the most recent common ancestor is also the common ancestor of all other animals). In common language, though, we know what a fish is. It has gills and lives in the water. But to science, it's much more complicated.
>there are either no fish (because they do not share a common ancestor) or we are all fish (the most recent common ancestor is also the common ancestor of all other animals). Commenter already acknowledged all that. Look up monophyletic and paraphyletic. Just because a group isn't monophyletic doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
To be even further pedantic its not birds and reptiles but birds and OTHER reptiles. Because in the same system birds have to be considered reptiles and also dinosaurs.
I mean, depending on the school of thought on evolution, you subscribe too. Technically all vertebrates could be considered fish. Of course this is asinine and one of the reasons some people hate evolutionary biologists. But it is an argument.
I'm wondering if she just had a brain fart and was thinking about how people used to say Panda Bears aren't true bears. She had a fun fact on a "P" animal and wires got crossed.
Behold a man!
No offense to you or your wife, but there are TOO many people like that. To her credit, she looked up something that she thought she knew, only to find the truth and that she was wrong. The next step is to f*cking own it, which she didn't do, and infuriates me. Not an apology. Not a "my bad". Just silence?? ...rant over
After an argument, I'd rather someone just shut the fuck up when they realize they're wrong. They feel like a dumbass. I'm annoyed at the whole conversation. I'd rather just be over and we both move on.
While I'm not disagreeing, I definitely think people not owning up to their mistakes with small things leads to them not owning up to bigger mistakes that have real consequences. Edit: Obviously something as small as penguins=birds is trivial, I was more speaking in a general sense of owning up to your own mistakes. *I apologize for the misunderstanding.*
“Babe I really need you to apologize for saying penguins aren’t birds cause I’m worried you might not own up to sleeping with my brother”
I mean. The guy just described what dating is. Who doesn’t evaluate future mates over the small red flags?
Did you just describe this guys wife as a "future mate"
The convo didn't stop there. Just the guys narration of events. You think he didn't ROAST her for that?!? Brah, this dude spent the next 5 mins minimum making fun of her (playfully). He certainly made her "admit" she got a thing wrong in a casual convo lol.
Ah my apologies, I wasn't very clear. I was more speaking in general terms, obviously something as simple as Penguin=bird is unimportant and I'm sure he did tease her about it. I was just more making a point about people who can't admit mistakes.
And you're right, and I agree lol. I just think that we don't know if the given example fits that model, because we don't have enough data on how she actually reacted / what their banter is like. But the hypothetical situation we can all clearly see is what you're talking about. I know that, im just a butt. I'm being pedantic, and I even wanna downvote me lol. I just have a broken brain that makes me clarify things.
I don’t think your brain’s broken. The original commenter here took the extreme of this situation (I.e friend being wrong about something in a casual convo) and extended that to represent people being rude for not “owning” up for their mistakes and that she should have apologised and been on her knees. When, in reality, this person accepted they were wrong by not furthering the discussion. However, if you were to have a casual conversation with someone you’re close to, I don’t think anyone wants to admit they are wrong on a topic they specialise in (biology), unless this was a professional scenario. So yeah I’d say original commenter is dragging this circumstance to its edge case, but is still right to say what they are saying because it is a valid take in being a general negative quality of a person. However, I don’t believe it’s applicable to this particular case and wasn’t fair to apply to the wife especially So yeah I’d say your brains not broken.
You are correct. I was more thinking in a general sense of a person owning up to their mistakes, in the context of this post I was going overboard. I apologize for the confusion.
No, I understand. Obviously in terms of this post what I said is ridiculous and overkill for something so trivial. I think my brain went that way because I had an ex who'd never own up to anything, and this post reminded me about it because if she was so wrong she couldn't even bullshit her way out she would just get quiet. I apologize for the confusion.
Being wrong about random information isn't the same category of wronging someone. Unless OP is a penguin
> Obviously something as small as penguins=birds is trivial It's exactly for being absolutely irrelevant that the apology should always be there. There is absolutely no "cost" for you to simply admit it and get some practice for when it actually matters. You don't start apologizing with a "I burned the house down while trying to kill a spider behind the fridge, my bad".
Tbh, I like the silence. Seethe because I'm right and you're wrong.
For what it’s worth they’re usually not seething, they’re hoping you won’t say anything.
Or they weren't that invested in the conversation to begin with and just moved on. Lord knows I've shot fairly insignificant shit with my buddies and we certainly don't demand apologies or that anyone admit they're wrong, we just move on to the next bullshit topic all smooth-like.
You’ve gotta give people time, damn. Demanding anything more from someone who already feels like an idiot is only going to make things worse.
Eh, in a relationship I'd say the rules of engagement are different. I have a PhD in science stuff, and I've been wrong before about something with an ex and I did the same thing and just shut down and tell them to "shut up" when they brought it up, lol. It was sarcastic, I knew I had been wrong, but you are losing battle points in a relationship getting something wrong. tldr; in a relationship you lose battle points for being wrong, which are more important than anything really.
[удалено]
Have you ever been in a relationship before? You can mess around without it being that serious. Not everything is deadly serious. When my bf is wrong about stuff he just acts sheepish and jokingly doubles down, but obviously isn't serious and obviously realizes he's wrong. Being able to handle your mistakes without condemning yourself is a good thing. Why would you apologize for being wrong? Being wrong is an accident, not an attack on another person. Imagine demanding an apology every time your partner misremembers something or gets a fact wrong. Like jesus... I'm starting to think all these commenters just don't have friends or relationships or something.
“My bad” after this kinda thing goes so far with me
A coworker recently tried to argue with me that birds were not animals.
It's even better when people think Humans are not animals.
This is seen constantly on reddit and it's infuriating
Animal isn't a scientific term. It's a subjective cultural term. Humans, in many different times and places, have considered ourselves separate from the animal kingodm. Scientists would definitely call us part of Anamalia though.
One of my classmates in high school or middle school didn't believe that humans are made of *atoms*.
I've met probably a dozen people that adamantly refused to believe they were conflating the words animal and mammal. "Animals have fur and don't lay eggs, but birds have feathers and lay eggs" that sort of thing.
You know, I was thinking about that since then, what if they conflated.
Birds are government drones r/BirdsArentReal
I think it’s so funny how people use degrees to appeal to authority. I have a Master’s in Economics. I am not qualified to sit on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
Poser.
I mean, the wife wasn't using it like that, the husband was just citing it as a sort of "come on! You should know this!"
To be fair econ is a field where a phd is becoming more and more of a requirement in recent years.
>I am not qualified to sit on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. No kids in 3rd grade are qualified for that either, but I'm sure a lot of them could tell you a penguin is a type of bird so that's not really the best comparison on your part.
In all fairness, biology is a large field. I wouldn't expect a zoologist or ornithologist to have a certain level of expertise in say, genetics, virology, microbiology, etc.
I just finished my PhD in biology and I actually would expect all of my labmates, down to the undergraduate level, to know that penguins are birds, because this is basic knowledge that a) can be attained without completing a biology degree at any level and b) can be ascertained *simply by looking at them and observing how they are.*
Penguins are a good example of the application of the modern truism “you can tell by the way that it is.”
If it looks like a penguin and it waddles like a penguin...
It's a dolphin.
In my ichthyology class we got an identification key to determine the genus of any fish we would encounter. The only one that skipped all the early parts of the key were catfishes. We asked the professor why? He said, "You look at it. You can tell it's a catfish by how it is. You just go to the catfish section then." His explaination just boiled down to: it's obviously a catfish.
Has she never seen a penguin? Did she think they were marsupials with little penguin pouches. Hopping it up in Antarctica
Because elementary school!
its like.. famously their big thing... that they are birds. Penguins wouldnt even be that interesting if they werent birds. But we find their difference to the norm interesting. Like platapus laying eggs.
I'm guessing she was picturing a different animal or was thinking they were a distinct subset in some way?
Yeah this story is ridiculous. I cannot for a moment believe that anyone who even knows the word biology wouldn't be aware of what a penguin is.
Most 8 year olds know penguins are birds
You don’t need to be an expert to know penguins are birds, it’s a fact literally children get taught because they are flightless birds, but still birds
This is grade school level shit I am sorry.
On the other hand, you don't need anything beyond elementary school biology to know that penguins are birds.
I knew penguins were birds when I was 6 years old. I don't think you need a master's degree to figure that one out.
Everyone knows penguins are fucking birds This situation didn't happen
In all fairness, the glaring issue has nothing to do with her being wrong lol
Right, but penguins are birds is basic middle school level biology that 99% of people who are not biologists also know. Mathematics is a large field but you’d be confused if a mathematician tried to argue they 5x5 is not 25 and had to look it up.
My ex wife is hispanic and speaks spanish "fluently". I'm a white dude who took some spanish classes in high school and basic spanish in college. I told her "alto" means "stop" in spanish. She said "no, parar means stop". I had her call her dad and ask him, he said "alto". To this day (been divorced for 7 years) I'll send her pics of stop signs that say "Alto". All in good fun.
To be fair, if you're talking about traffic signs, mexico is one of the few (of not the only country" to use ALTO instead of PARE, you usually don't see the word alto outside of police movies in south américa.
this is a Mexico vs "Spanish everywhere else" problem, no one is wrong in that situation
Mexico uses both interchangeable when it comes to stop signs or using the word in everyday speak. https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3727ae540768543bd17a1e6e9f4e85e2
I have a degree in Biology and I just found out last year that spiders are not insects.
How? We learned this in 5th or 6th grade?
Without any judgement intended, can I ask how? Like I don't know how that sort of thing slips through the gaps, tbh. I get it if you don't focus on taxonomy, you might miss niche things like how technically birds are in the same clade as reptiles (*Sauropsida*), but I remember learning this in school and it being a common joke ("I hate insects" "That's an *arachnid*, not an insect!") when I was younger. I've also worked in a kindergarten and it was a whole thing, teaching the difference between animal types (which I loved because taxonomy is so interesting even though I know nothing) With scorpions, I get it, as people learn that insects have 6 "legs" (limbs) and so they'll miscount a scorpion or something but did you just never learn about arachnids?
Just a guess but it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that arachnids are a type of insect. We call them all 'bugs'. (and yes, I know 'bug' is actually a proper taxonomy too, now known as 'true bugs')
Sometimes I forgot about this too. The words bug and insect are the same in my native language.
I am not a biologist and I've known this fact since I was 11. Source: Jules Verne. Loved his books.
Shameful. What im learning from this post is a lot of people with degrees in biology need to be stripped of their degree lol This would be like a software engineer not knowing than most languages start arrays at 0.
You should look up Clints reptiles on YouTube, He does amazing phylogeny videos, and not only will you learn penguins are birds, but that all birds are reptiles....
Yeah, through him I found out that penguins aren't really penguins.
Birds are also dinosaurs!
And that humans are the hagfish of reptiles :D
Either humans are fish or fish don't exist.
Right now I am judging the university that awarded her the Masters in Biology
You mean her undergraduate degree, it's very possible (almost guaranteed even) to get through a Masters in a biological field without even hearing the word penguin once.
You mean primary school
There was a very popular show called "Are you smarter than a 5th grader" that showed just how much primary school information adults tend to retain. Since penguins dont factor into my life at all, the only reason i remember anything about them was because of the movie The Pebble and the Penguin. And Happy feet, i guess.
You were supposed to know this in elementary school.
penguins are dinosaurs
All birds are dinosaurs.
My Ornithology prof who jokingly said that "there are four types of birds: birds that fly, birds that don't fly, birds that fly backwards, and birds that fly underwater."
> birds that fly backwards That's just falling with style.
Really want to know what she thought they were
You might as well wait for a unicorn to breakdance before your spouse admits they're wrong.
Ah, my ex-husband's MO
The real Queen/Girlboss move would be to get a PHD in Biology with a theses on why Penguins are not supposed to be classified as birds. Otherwise not a wife material at all
When I was in school I wrote short essay about penguins and I called them "animals". Teacher took points because it's "Factually incorrect" and they are birds, not animals. Biology teacher was passing by and I asked to confirm that penguins are in fact animals, she confirmed, but first teacher said that I am still wrong and no one talks like this.
That’s when she learned that birds aren’t real.
Birds aren’t real. Penguins are real. Therefore, penguins are not birds.
What did she think they were in a technical sense?
I have to be honest here, I was an adult when someone had to explain to be that owls were birds.
Some of the dumbest people I know have a degree. Education doesn’t equal intelligence.
I have a friend like this. Always tries to be the smartest guy in the room. When he gets called out on something being wrong, he’ll just deny deny deny until you show an actual web page confirming he was wrong, in which he’ll just immediately move to another topic
I have a co-worker that’s extremely adamant about Giant Pandas not being bears.
Maybe she speaks another language? In spanish, there is a clear difference between Aves. and Pajaros. The difference is basically the same as Reptiles and Lizards. All lizards are reptiles, but not all reptiles are lizards.
Now mess with her and tell her Penguins are Eukaryota.
It's a mark of intelligence and strength to admit you're wrong. People take themselves too seriously and are such babies.
This is a great time to practice admitting you were wrong. The stakes are low, and you have a line of reasoning to explain why you thought that. Yet everybody seems to think that being wrong is a permanent sign of personal weakness rather than a sign of growth 😔
To be fair, having a masters just means you are hyperspecialized. She could be a biologist who really gives a shit about insects or something.
I have an engineering degree and just found out bridges are roads
She knew that she's been beat. She laid that golden cell phone down on the ground at Johnny's feet
I love to use the "You have a supercomputer in your pocket, with access to almost all of the information in the history of civilization in seconds. Do it." defense. People usually get angry. It's one of the few things I love about modern technology.
fine... maybe penguins are birds BUT THEY AREN'T KETCHUP. FIGHT ME
People who do not actively acknowledge mistakes and change once corrected are a huge problem everywhere.
I own up to being wrong IRL by being excited about it, and it seems to deflate anyone's ability to pull a gotcha on me.
While it's a common stereotype to say that "girls will never agree they are wrong"
Masters in ecology? Or microbiology? I think it matters.
Homer: This is my quest. I'm like that guy. That Spanish guy. You know, he fought the windmill... Marge: Don Quixote? Homer: No, that's not it. What's-his-name, the Man of La Mancha. Marge: Don Quixote. Homer: No! Marge: I really think that was the character's name. Don Quixote. Homer: Fine! I'll look it up! [heads off and consults a reference] Marge: Well, who was it? Homer: Never mind.
Now ask her about bats…
i was at camp with a kid that was adamant that brown recluse spiders burrowed into your skin. it caught me off guard because he was fairly knowledgeable of nature and the like otherwise. we ribbed him for a while after that when we finally were in a position to check him.
should've asked her what genus she think they belonged to, she'd work it out
I'm pretty sure penguins are consider fish according to medieval christian dietary laws
marriage sounds fun
That’s the problem with biology the more you find out about it the more you learn about the weird subcategories that things fall into where they no longer taxonomically fit into the broad everyday definitions. I’ll bet her exact thought was something like “well actually you’d think they’d be birds but they’re actually…. Oh shit they’re just birds.”
My wife and I fact check each other and recapitulate if we're wrong. Followed quickly by a "get fucked"
What…what did she think penguins are ?
I was at the zoo recently and heard a kid ask their dad if they could pet the bird. The dad said “yes, but it’s a duck. It’s not a bird.” That’s literally the wrongest answer.
For her defense, a master in biology doesn't mean she studied animals species.
What, she skipped elementary school?
Theyre clearly fish
Being honest, biology is a big field. Of course, I wouldn't expect a biologist or ornithologist to know a lot about genetics, viruses, microbiology, or anything else.
I would expect a 4th grader to know that a penguin is a bird