3 ms·
This is a pedantic dismissal of the comment above. We all understood what he meant. If your intent is to educate HN on the difference between species, genus,
by khazhoux 5y ago
This is a pedantic dismissal of the comment above. We all understood what he meant.
If your intent is to educate HN on the difference between species, genus, family, order, ..., perhaps do so more constructively?
- bryanrasmussen 5y agoI guess I just felt that there was quite a large number of dinosaur species for civilization to arise in, not to mention they were on land, so it might be weird to say sharks didn't develop civilization over a long period of time given the differences compared. But I suppose you didn't understand what I meant.
- selestify 5y agoI don't think any of that was conveyed by the phrase "Dinosaurs weren't a species" :)
- bryanrasmussen 5y agoI guess I do have a tendency to not specify everything but to just leave some things as implied, that said I think the amount of dinosaur species vs. the amount of shark species is strongly implied when saying dinosaurs is not a species in context. The land thing was not as strongly implied but again one might consider it when thinking yeah dinosaurs aren't a species, neither are sharks but the numbers don't align...hmm,hmm oh yeah and also the dinosaur species covered many more possible environments.
- selestify 5y agoHaha I do that too sometimes. But for perspective, it's quite a leap for me (and it seems most others reading this too), and not at all "strongly implied" by your statement, even in context. I'm sure that chain of inference might be natural and automatic with your style of thinking, but my mind naturally goes down a completely different path when confronted with your initial statement, so it's probably best to elaborate what you're actually implying to avoid miscommunication :)