#clades

[er-cryptid]

Clade Sauropsida

Patreon

[hero-villian-blog]

Mutants Are Human

So recently I've been watching X-Men 97 with some friends, and something I keep hearing is people in the series constantly refer to each other as either human or mutant.

While some non mutants making such a differentiation would make sense, I don't think it makes sense for mutants especially the smart ones, or even scientists to say mutants are different from humans.

Also, it's not just X-Men 97, it's the movies and the comics as well. There's even a line from the movies where someone says humans evolved from Neanderthals and wiped out Neanderthals. All this misunderstands how evolution works. There is an evolutionary rule called the Law of Monophyly the rule goes that you will always be part of the group you evolved from. It's why humans are still apes and will always be apes no matter how much we evolve. Humans are also still sarcopterygian fish, and we will never stop being sarcopterygian fish.

So mutants are humans and will always be humans. As for the Neanderthal thing, Neanderthals are a sister species to Homo Sapiens but are still part of genus homo making them humans too. Homo Sapiens did not evolve from Neanderthals either.

So while I get maybe someone who doesn't know who evolution works or simply hates mutants would say mutants aren't humans. I don't get how scientists or someone like Charles Xavier would make such a blunder. I think the only character I've seen that didn't make this mistake and basically corrected everyone else, was the evil robot Master Mold. In his words, "That is not logical, mutants are human. Therefore humans must be protected from themselves." Written by Eris the Lorekeeper

[he-who-needs-to-be-silenced]

would you be interested in steps in the evolution of a clade on erythra

Yess plis

what is erythra????

results

Voting ended onMay 15, 2024

The clade could be something in pseudaves, spiridae or chelotheuthida. Idk will figure it out later

Prolly should put this:

Erythra is my speculative biology planet

The life forms are diverse and adaptable

And I absolutely love this planet

[ailurinae]

moles != rodents

Re: mole classification

This tree isn't totally up to date and indeed these high level relationships remain hard to figure out, but the orange (Laurasiatheria) and blue (Euarchontoglires) groupings are overall correct, and rodents and moles (in the group Eulipotyphia) are not close at all. Rodents are closer to rabbits and primates than to moles, and moles are closer to hoofed mammals and dogs than to rodents.

[therobotmonster]

On Foxes, Dogs and Fluffiness

Tumblr's decided to do another biological gaslighting joke in an ongoing effort to be maximally hostile to people who are "annoying" by trying to post correct information when people are actively lying on the internet. You know, people who probably have difficulty in reading social cues, or who are compelled to info dump about subjects they're passionate about.

Rather than open myself up to that clowncar directly, I am going to post my response to the "are foxes dogs" argument here, in case some people might be interested more in the interesting biology facts.

--

Ugh, Kingdom, Phylum. Fie. That's all well and good for Linnaeas and the days of yore. These days we use clades, a sequential, nesting systems of diagnostic traits built on the only biological category that means anything in reality, the species (and even that's annoyingly fuzzy)

Basically, kingdom/phylum/etc are just buckets that don't correlate to real biological traits, so instead, the clade system lines up traits by their appearance in the evolutionary history, and treats life as the family tree it is, with the appropriate considerations to keep Diogenes at bay.

Fluffiness, is a dog trait, but it is not exclusive to dogs being far more basal, predating mammals. It is possible that hair and feathers are descended from the same structure, so fluffiness might be a trait held by most modern terapod lineages, even if some later gained smoothness as an adaptation, like dolphins.

The actual reason you know that foxes are canids, and thus at least colloquially dogs, is actually their cute widdle legs and their beans.

Dogs are close cousins to bears, and the creatively named bear-dog ancestor of both groups had plantigrade hind limbs, walking flat on the foot like bears do. Your main point of divergence is the adaptation of the limbs for running, including ditigrade hind limbs, and feet specialized for running.

So its the beans (in combination with a ton of previously evolved traits), not the fluff.

[archi-pelago]

Let’s take a walk down easy street, where you can be reborn

Clades belongs to @kingofbeartraps

[therobotmonster]

Either there’s no such thing as fish or you are, in fact, a fish.

[thelovebudllc]

How a few bat clades, not all, shape global spillover risk

A large-scale study reveals that only a few bat lineages harbor viruses with high epidemic potential, reshaping our understanding of zoonotic threats and calling for more targeted, clade-specific disease monitoring rather than a broad fear of bats. Study: Viral epidemic potential is not uniformly distributed across the bat phylogeny. Image Credit: Faisal_Fatso  / Shutterstock In a recent study…

View On WordPress