My Mormon boyfriend
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-08-2014, 11:37 AM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 11:03 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-08-2014 12:33 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  For the same reason that Aves are still Dinosaurs, and they are all still diapsids.

And the reason is ... ?

Non-cladistic (ie, paraphyletic) taxa are deprecated.

The colloquial vocabulary doesn't particularly fit with strict cladistic divisions, though.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2014, 12:31 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 11:03 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, no, and no. 'Tetrapod' is a broad class of animals with a common ancestor - there is no confusion over names.

It is a super class, all animals with back bones and have homologous structures(though snakes, legless lizards, and caecilian) Hell even wikipedia says that tetrapods are all four limb animals and their decedents.

(25-08-2014 11:03 AM)Chas Wrote:  'Monkey' is specific to a a subset of species that are descended from an ancestor common to modern monkeys and apes. The point is that the terminology you are insisting on is confusing.

Calling ancient species by modern names just leads to confusion.

Well what happens when it turns out it was in the same taxonomic group as that modern species? You are right about the word monkey as it is like the word fish and bug, they are a description of certain animals even though it is not a taxonmic rank. In fact english is one of the few languages the distinguish monkey and ape. Most languages see them as the same thing.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2014, 01:00 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 11:37 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(25-08-2014 11:03 AM)Chas Wrote:  And the reason is ... ?

Non-cladistic (ie, paraphyletic) taxa are deprecated.

The colloquial vocabulary doesn't particularly fit with strict cladistic divisions, though.

Which is my point. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2014, 01:02 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 12:31 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Well what happens when it turns out it was in the same taxonomic group as that modern species? You are right about the word monkey as it is like the word fish and bug, they are a description of certain animals even though it is not a taxonmic rank. In fact english is one of the few languages the distinguish monkey and ape. Most languages see them as the same thing.

Right. So stop using 'monkey' that way.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2014, 02:20 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 01:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-08-2014 12:31 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Well what happens when it turns out it was in the same taxonomic group as that modern species? You are right about the word monkey as it is like the word fish and bug, they are a description of certain animals even though it is not a taxonmic rank. In fact english is one of the few languages the distinguish monkey and ape. Most languages see them as the same thing.

Right. So stop using 'monkey' that way.

Well that is where it gets technical. Monkey is not a taxonmic rank, however certain simians in general are considered monkeys. Aegyptopithecus was in fact a monkey. A monkey is usually described as a primate with a dry nose and a tail. Aegyptopithecus had a tail. However some modern monkeys like Barbary macaques are monkeys where some don't even have tails. So not having a tail does not mean you are not a monkey. Plus to think about it we share more with monkeys than with other mammals. It comes to question that if we share a common ancestory with monkeys does that mean all things down the line would be common ancestory as well? Would that mean we shared a common ancestor with chordates and a common ancestor with mammals, and shared a common ancestor with deuterostomes instead of being mammals,chordates,and deuterostomes? Do we pick and choose what humans are but then what humans just share a common ancestry with? Is taxonomy, cladistics, and phylogeny now subjective too what feels good? Well know, if we could grow out of evolutionary ancestor we would not be deuterostomes or chordates due to the fact they are far down our evolutionary line.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2014, 02:33 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 02:20 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(25-08-2014 01:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  Right. So stop using 'monkey' that way.

Well that is where it gets technical. Monkey is not a taxonmic rank, however certain simians in general are considered monkeys. Aegyptopithecus was in fact a monkey. A monkey is usually described as a primate with a dry nose and a tail. Aegyptopithecus had a tail. However some modern monkeys like Barbary macaques are monkeys where some don't even have tails. So not having a tail does not mean you are not a monkey. Plus to think about it we share more with monkeys than with other mammals. It comes to question that if we share a common ancestory with monkeys does that mean all things down the line would be common ancestory as well? Would that mean we shared a common ancestor with chordates and a common ancestor with mammals, and shared a common ancestor with deuterostomes instead of being mammals,chordates,and deuterostomes? Do we pick and choose what humans are but then what humans just share a common ancestry with? Is taxonomy, cladistics, and phylogeny now subjective too what feels good? Well know, if we could grow out of evolutionary ancestor we would not be deuterostomes or chordates due to the fact they are far down our evolutionary line.

You are entirely missing the point. Have fun, I'm done.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-08-2014, 02:52 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(25-08-2014 02:33 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-08-2014 02:20 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Well that is where it gets technical. Monkey is not a taxonmic rank, however certain simians in general are considered monkeys. Aegyptopithecus was in fact a monkey. A monkey is usually described as a primate with a dry nose and a tail. Aegyptopithecus had a tail. However some modern monkeys like Barbary macaques are monkeys where some don't even have tails. So not having a tail does not mean you are not a monkey. Plus to think about it we share more with monkeys than with other mammals. It comes to question that if we share a common ancestory with monkeys does that mean all things down the line would be common ancestory as well? Would that mean we shared a common ancestor with chordates and a common ancestor with mammals, and shared a common ancestor with deuterostomes instead of being mammals,chordates,and deuterostomes? Do we pick and choose what humans are but then what humans just share a common ancestry with? Is taxonomy, cladistics, and phylogeny now subjective too what feels good? Well know, if we could grow out of evolutionary ancestor we would not be deuterostomes or chordates due to the fact they are far down our evolutionary line.

You are entirely missing the point. Have fun, I'm done.

That point is?

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2014, 12:52 AM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
Can this derail get split and get an order of Ghostexorcist?

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free Thought's post
26-08-2014, 10:24 PM
RE: My Mormon boyfriend
(26-08-2014 12:52 AM)Free Thought Wrote:  Can this derail get split and get an order of Ghostexorcist?

Seconded
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RogueWarrior's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: