←back to thread

Eels are fish

(eocampaign1.com)
178 points speckx | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.199s | source
Show context
boesboes ◴[] No.45116372[source]
Apparently we are all fish. Or fish don't exist.

To explain: if you want to define a taxonomy in which all things that look like fish and swim are 'fish' then we are too. We are more closely related to most 'fish' than sharks are. I.e the last common ancestor of herring AND sharks is older than our & herring's LCA.

replies(16): >>45116523 #>>45116561 #>>45116589 #>>45116591 #>>45116672 #>>45116695 #>>45116701 #>>45116727 #>>45116873 #>>45116932 #>>45117053 #>>45117159 #>>45117194 #>>45117563 #>>45121139 #>>45123694 #
quietbritishjim ◴[] No.45116873[source]
Looking at the Wikipedia article for fish, it looks like a reasonable definition would be:

* Everything in the subphylum vertebrata (i.e. vertibrates)

* Except tetrapoda (tetrapods: amphibians, reptiles, mammals and the like).

It's not perfect because tetrapoda does fit within vertebrata in a biological / genetic sense (as a sibling comment put it: fish is not a monophyletic group). But it's a precise enough definition that I don't think we need to claim that we're all fish or that there's no such thing as a fish (as the QI elves would say).

replies(2): >>45116997 #>>45117054 #
daedrdev ◴[] No.45117054[source]
Mammals include orcas and whales
replies(1): >>45117127 #
SideburnsOfDoom ◴[] No.45117127[source]
And orcas and whales are not fish.
replies(3): >>45121176 #>>45123347 #>>45123457 #
1. emmelaich ◴[] No.45123347[source]
But literarily (not literally) they can be.

See also https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-ma...