1368
On trees... (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
182 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 29 points 2 weeks ago

Impossible. If there were no such thing as fish, how could bees be fish?

[-] [email protected] 34 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I don’t have the tools to know how to respond to this comment. You win.

Edit: Holy shit. I just did a quick google. Boydster is not shitting us. Just google “bees are fish.” Oddly enough, this actually furthers the thesis of fish not existing.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

To add on for anyone who is lazy like me, the thing where Google summarizes says California has classified bees as fish under an environmental protection act. According to the first result (Reddit) it's because fish is a catch all term in that law. Instead of listing all the animals they just use fish. Because fish,bees, and the other animals are all invertebrates.

Now whoever reads this has three Lemmy comments, a reddit thread reference, and an ai overview reference as some solid sources

[-] [email protected] 18 points 2 weeks ago

Fish are vertebrates they have a backbone

[-] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

Some fish are, yeah

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sorry bro, all fish are vertebrates

While I understand it is an arbitrary classification system designed by humans, one of the defining factors of fish is that they are vertebrates.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

What about starfishes? Checkmate.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

That made me chuckle, but because this is a science meme forum, I will just clarify that starfish are not fish.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Source?

Because all the sources I've come across say that "fish" is not a monophylatic classification and is essentially arbitrary.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago
[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

... and Wikipedia states that the category of "fish" is paraphylatic, meaning that it is defined by convention rather than 'fact' and its boundaries can be argued, since it excludes some of the descendants of fish.

also, as pointed out by another commenter, we use the word fish to describe lots of things that are not included in this definition, like starfish and crayfish.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

So you’re suggesting that because we all evolved from a sesspool swamp we are all fish?

I’m down

Trees also do not have a real definition. But you think you know what a tree is.

Fish have a more strict definition than trees.

I provided you a source please name a fish that is an invertebrate or what not that is really cool and has the backbone in some other genetically cool place

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Having recently learned about trees, I actually don't think I know what a tree is. at least, not enough to create a reasonable, non-blurry definition of "tree."

You've defined fish as being vertebrates, and as such I cannot find an invertebrate that fits that definition. But what you can't do is just say the word "fish" and expect me to know what you mean - you have to provide a definition, and I could provide a different definition in a different context and neither of us would really be "wrong."

If you did just say "fish" without providing a definition, I would be tempted to either exclude sharks or include crabs, depending on context.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Sharks are fish I believe but I am not the one making the definitions. Wikipedia / fish …

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

What a nicely packaged little subthread to come across while decompressing after a super busy day, lol!

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Fish are vertebrates they have a backbone

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I don’t have the tools to know how to respond to this comment. You win.

This is the best way I've ever seen utter befuddlement expressed. Chapeau!

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Beavers are also fish.

[-] LMurch 3 points 1 week ago

This is like the whole, "triceratops didn't exist, it's just a young Torosaurus" thing all over again. My world can't handle this!

this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
1368 points (98.9% liked)

Science Memes

14976 readers
967 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]