You must log in or register to comment.
Anyone know what kind of animal that is? I need to see more! (and is it albino?)
2
Nothing wrong with me
3
Nothing wrong with me
4
Nothing wrong with me
5
Nothing wrong with me
Bro, animals among the most numerous creatures? Bacteria, Archaea, and viruses are surely more numerous. I bet the same applies to fungi and plants. Oh, and protists, since they are unicellular and have twice the total biomass of animals.
In terms of biomass, animals are barely significant. And they are relatively big. So they surely are less numerous than other groups.
Count em
Catch em
Something wrong with you
Technically, they did say AMONG the most numerous.
I mean, yes, inaccuracy is another issue here. But I assume “the most numerous” means better than average, or at lest not the worst in its category (unless you actually standardize for the time since divergence, then there are probably some niche microbial taxa, some rare extremophiles, that are actually less numerous; still, surely worse than average).
Who invited this guy?
I don’t think anything that’s not an animal can be accurately called a creature.
Then you would be wrong.
Yeah, you’re right. Some definitions are more limited, but others cover anything that can move of its own accord. I don’t think fungi or plants qualify, though.
I am so glad the image went the same place my mind went
now go enjoy this brilliant parody, “I Can Only Count to Four”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8ccGjar4Es
at 1, I’m sitting and thinking of all the beautiful things i could’ve become.
You don’t understand, I coulda had chill. I could have been a capybara. I coulda been somebody… instead of a human, which is what I am, let’s face it.
instead of a lyrical oracle and a most appreciative one?
