• GraniteM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Fuck that, I’ve been in close proximity to ostriches and emus and they one hundred percent seem like dinosaurs.

      • GraniteM@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The cassowary was the only thing in the zoo that Steve Irwin seemed a little bit scared of. There’s an episode where the cassowary got loose and he immediately stopped joking around and told all the keepers to go get the shields to corral it back into its pen. I wouldn’t dream of fucking around with a cassowary.

  • AmidFuror@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    TIL dimetrodon is not a dinosaur, based on a silhouette in a cartoon.

    I haven’t really thought about dimetrodons since I was a kid.

  • SatyrSack@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    47 minutes ago

    The title text is a further joke about taxonomy, predicated on the assumption that staplers are biological organisms (which they are not)[citation needed]

  • turboSnail@piefed.europe.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Non-biologist here. Is this a taxonomy thing? So, if it’s under /animalia/chordata/reptilia/dinosauria/, it’s in that dino box, right?

    What about penguins then? According to Wikipedia, they’re under /animalia/chordata/aves/etc. I don’t see …/reptilia/dinosauria/ anywhere in that classification. Likewise, seagulls are under /animalia/chordata/aves/… etc. so nowhere near dinosauria. What am I missing here?

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

      What am I missing here?

      That untangling evolutionary history is really messy :D It’s not part of Kingdom/Phylum/Class/etc classification, but biologists also use clades to understand evolutionary history. Birds and theropod dinosaurs belong to the clade Theropoda, and to the clade Saurischia which includes some more dinosaurs, and they all belong to the Dinosauria clade which includes all dinosaurs.

      The division (as interpreted by evolutionary biologists) between birds and the rest of Saurischia is smaller than the division between Saurischia and the rest of Dinosauria. So, if everything in Dinosauria is a dinosaur, so are birds.

      • turboSnail@piefed.europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Ok, so what’s the deal with this clade thing? Why don’t we use that for classifying birds?

        Then again, maximizing the number of inconsistent exceptions seem to be a running theme in biology, so I guess it’s on brand…

        • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          48 minutes ago

          Clades are used for classifying birds and everything else, it’s just a little messier than the neat Kingdom/Phylum/Order/etc way of laying out evolutionary history. If you think of a species as being a specific pinpoint on the tree of life, clades are more like drawing a circle around a lot of pinpoints and branches.

          But yeah, biology is nothing but ‘the last thing we taught you was an oversimplification!’ all the way down.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          53 minutes ago

          We do, a clade is just a group consisting of an ancestor and all its descendants. So basically, the evidence indicates that birds are all the descendants of a more traditional dinosaur and are more closely related to more classic dinosaurs like t Rex and velociraptors than those dinos are to ones like brontosaurus.

          In part this is done by examining physical characteristics in fossil specimens and seeing where traits seem to appear and how they seem to evolve over time. Like it’s obvious that marsupials are more closely related to us placental mammals than either are to birds or reptiles. After all we give live birth and have hair and milk. And both groups are more closely related to each other than egg laying mammals (monotremes) like platypuses, but that all three are more related to each other than birds, alligators, and lizards. And you can keep going looking at less and less obvious traits. And eventually you see that a weird division in how jaws work happened in the Paleolithic that separated these two clades, and that actually dimetrodon is more closely related to us than to dinosaurs.

          And since you can do stuff like that you can see that in the jurassic a group of theropod dinosaurs started evolving feathers, and some even evolved beaks and wings. And by the cretaceous some of these dinosaurs were what we’d call birds today. And even better for them, many were small generalists, which we suspect is the best thing to have been at the end of the cretaceous as species fitting that description seemed to survive the best during the extinction event.

    • VitoRobles@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’m a bit thick. Not certain if this is a joke that went over my head or not.

      Im still in a rabbit hole trying to understand why some aren’t dinosaurs.

      • BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        If you take the tree of life showing the evolutionary branch, you won’t be able to pick off a branch that includes all of the things you would think of as “fish” but excludes all of the things you think of as “not fish”.

        The reason for that is that all land animals with a four limb body plan, including reptiles, mammals, and birds dinosaurs evolved from a family of fish called tetrapods. But there are still tetrapods in the ocean that you would think of as “fish”, and I don’t mean whales.

        Hank Green has a much more entertaining and complete discussion at https://youtu.be/-C3lR3pczjo

      • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Basically all life on Earth that’s not some bacteria or fungi originally developed in the oceans, and only later adapted to life on land. If you go back far enough, the common ancestor of anything that walks, crawls, or flies ultimately originally swam.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    If penguins are still dinosaurs, then earth is still solely inhabited by single cell organisms and we’re clearly not.

    • trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I’ve never heard of a clade for single cell organisms, though there are some that only contain single cell organisms