Comment

Birds are reptiles. Commonly, we wouldn’t say so, but they’re in the same clade. The avians are closer related to the crocadilians than the crocs are to other reptiles like the squamates - lizards and snakes.

source

Sort:hotnew top

LillyPip@lemmy.ca ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Also people are fish. You can’t evolve out of your clade.

source
- abir_v@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  Hank Green went off about this recently. “Fish” just has no scientific meaning, and there are fish tetrapods.
  
  I don’t necessarily disagree, but ultimately there is a problem in classifying “fish” in the modern scientific taxonomy system - it has no good phylum to fit in as its a term that’s a bit more broad than that, but not broad enough to make for a kingdom.
  
  source
  - LillyPip@lemmy.ca ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Sure, but isn’t the point that what we’d call ‘fish’ back when everything lived in the oceans, like pre-Devonian, the ancestors of all modern life?
    
    We can’t out-evolve our clade, so all land animals are fish? And also we’re all amphibians, and everything directly leading to us? Insects, plants, and fungi are separate, but we’re technically fish?
    
    Or am i misunderstanding that?
    
    source
    abir_v@lemmy.world ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Yeah, I’m not really arguing for or against the word fish technically fitting all land animals. I think that using it that way showcases the problem of trying to fit common terminology like “fish” into the scientific taxonomic system. The definition of fish has no use in that context.
    
    Also, there are fish which are also arguably tetrapods en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcopterygii
    
    source
    -> View More Comments