Comment on Double standards

• mienshao@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Lol just admit you got it wrong, why argue? You said peacocks are endangered, and they’re not. Just say oops and move on.

  source

  • ayyy@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    They recognized a blind spot in their knowledge, did some learning, then reported back with what they learned. Then you yelled at them? It’s not like they were being combative.

    source
  • Klear@quokk.au ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Here’s the thing. You said a “peacocks are endangered.” Is Green peafowl in the same genus? Yes. No one’s arguing that. As someone who is a scientist who studies peacocks, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls Green peafowl peacocks. If you want to be “specific” like you said, then you shouldn’t either. They’re not the same thing. If you’re saying “peacocks” you’re referring to the taxonomic grouping of Pavonini, which includes things from indian peafowl to mbulus to green peafowl. So your reasoning for calling a peacocks endangered is because random people “call the ornamental animals peacocks?” Let’s get mandarin ducks in there, then, too. Also, calling someone a human or an ape? It’s not one or the other, that’s not how taxonomy works. They’re both. A green peafowl is a green peafowl and a member of the pavo genus. But that’s not what you said. You said peacocks are endangered, which is not true unless you’re okay with calling all members of the pavonini tribe endangered, which means you’d call indian peacocks, congo peafowl, and other peacocks endangered, too. Which you said you don’t. It’s okay to just admit you’re wrong, you know?

    source

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      A peacock is a crow.

      source

      • Klear@quokk.au ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

        Here’s the thing… I’ll allow it.

        source
    • Darkmuch@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Damn, Unidan in Lemmy? Who woulda thought.

      source