Comment by monopoliessuck

Comment by monopoliessuck 5 hours ago

5 replies

I added Jellyfish and then Portuguese Man-o-war.

It took the man o war, but crossed out Jellyfish and said "added a vaguer term", but a jellyfish and a man-o-war are discrete animals.

The man-o-war is a colonial siphonophore composed of zooids, while a jellyfish is a singular marine organism.

They're both in the phylum Cnidaria, and that would have been a more vague term had I entered it.

NooneAtAll3 9 minutes ago

that's like saying tomato is a fruit

in biological journal, sure - for practical purposes straight up no

if it looks like a jellyfish, stings like a jellyfish and behaves like a jellyfish - then it doesn't matter what it looks like under a microscope, it is jellyfish

cainxinth an hour ago

It raises the question: can a colony of individual animals (zooids in this case) that work cooperatively be called a singular animal itself? I think biologists say yes, but it’s an interesting taxonomic boundary.

4gotunameagain 5 hours ago

yeah there are lots of inaccuracies.

I added bobcat, then lynx, and it would not accept lynx because bobcat was there.

Oh, and, 77, just woke up. No coffee.

  • Sharlin 2 hours ago

    "Lynx" can refer to either the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) specifically, or to the genus Lynx and the four extant species in it (Eurasian lynx, Canada lynx, Iberian lynx, bobcat). And the game recognizes all the four lynx species as distinct animals if you use the full names. In general it understands imprecise common/genus names as hypernyms of the more precise species names, which is the correct way to do it IMO.

    In general, of course, even distantly related animals may share a common name due to superficial similarities – what is "robin", for example? The American robin was named after the European robin by analogy, simply because both happen to have a red breast. The two species aren't even in the same family.

  • yellowapple 3 hours ago

    Likewise, it wouldn't accept “panther” because “tiger” was already there:

    > I assume you mean “panther” in the general sense of any big cat.

    Why on Earth would it assume mean that, of all things, rather than “black panther”? If it's gonna be pedantic about it, it could've complained about “leopard” and “jaguar” already being there (which they were) instead of complaining about an animal that nobody in their right mind would call a “panther”.