Page 6 of 6 [ 87 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

01 Apr 2009, 11:07 pm

Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that paramecia aren't animals.


Then it's about time you changed your mind.

A paramecium is no more an animal than a tree or a piece of kelp is.


See http://101science.com/paramecium.htm

That classification system does not seem representative of the commonly used ones. It mentions in its own notes that contemporaneous systems oftentimes recognize Protista as a kingdom to itself, and, indeed, proposed modern classification schemes involve rather a few more "kingdoms" than even that. For one example, see here. In general, I have rarely heard protists included in the animal kingdom.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

01 Apr 2009, 11:21 pm

twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that paramecia aren't animals.


Then it's about time you changed your mind.

A paramecium is no more an animal than a tree or a piece of kelp is.


See http://101science.com/paramecium.htm

That classification system does not seem representative of the commonly used ones. It mentions in its own notes that contemporaneous systems oftentimes recognize Protista as a kingdom to itself, and, indeed, proposed modern classification schemes involve rather a few more "kingdoms" than even that. For one example, see here. In general, I have rarely heard protists included in the animal kingdom.


The prime difference between plants and animals is that plants have a cell wall which animals do not. Paramecia fall into the class of animals.



twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

01 Apr 2009, 11:27 pm

Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that paramecia aren't animals.


Then it's about time you changed your mind.

A paramecium is no more an animal than a tree or a piece of kelp is.


See http://101science.com/paramecium.htm

That classification system does not seem representative of the commonly used ones. It mentions in its own notes that contemporaneous systems oftentimes recognize Protista as a kingdom to itself, and, indeed, proposed modern classification schemes involve rather a few more "kingdoms" than even that. For one example, see here. In general, I have rarely heard protists included in the animal kingdom.


The prime difference between plants and animals is that plants have a cell wall which animals do not. Paramecia fall into the class of animals.

Even your own source lists fungi as neither plant nor animal; protista has existed for quite some time. Anyway, the cell wall argument is an "a priori" classification style, and is not sufficient to justify a classification as "natural" in and of itself at all. Nowadays, the approach tends to be more >>>clade<<< oriented.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

01 Apr 2009, 11:40 pm

twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that paramecia aren't animals.


Then it's about time you changed your mind.

A paramecium is no more an animal than a tree or a piece of kelp is.


See http://101science.com/paramecium.htm

That classification system does not seem representative of the commonly used ones. It mentions in its own notes that contemporaneous systems oftentimes recognize Protista as a kingdom to itself, and, indeed, proposed modern classification schemes involve rather a few more "kingdoms" than even that. For one example, see here. In general, I have rarely heard protists included in the animal kingdom.


The prime difference between plants and animals is that plants have a cell wall which animals do not. Paramecia fall into the class of animals.

Even your own source lists fungi as neither plant nor animal; protista has existed for quite some time. Anyway, the cell wall argument is an "a priori" classification style, and is not sufficient to justify a classification as "natural" in and of itself at all. Nowadays, the approach tends to be more >>>clade<<< oriented.


All classification is a matter of grouping abstract characteristics. Protozoa have, in my experience, been placed under animals. I did not create the system.



twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

01 Apr 2009, 11:49 pm

Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that paramecia aren't animals.


Then it's about time you changed your mind.

A paramecium is no more an animal than a tree or a piece of kelp is.


See http://101science.com/paramecium.htm

That classification system does not seem representative of the commonly used ones. It mentions in its own notes that contemporaneous systems oftentimes recognize Protista as a kingdom to itself, and, indeed, proposed modern classification schemes involve rather a few more "kingdoms" than even that. For one example, see here. In general, I have rarely heard protists included in the animal kingdom.


The prime difference between plants and animals is that plants have a cell wall which animals do not. Paramecia fall into the class of animals.

Even your own source lists fungi as neither plant nor animal; protista has existed for quite some time. Anyway, the cell wall argument is an "a priori" classification style, and is not sufficient to justify a classification as "natural" in and of itself at all. Nowadays, the approach tends to be more >>>clade<<< oriented.


All classification is a matter of grouping abstract characteristics. Protozoa have, in my experience, been placed under animals. I did not create the system.

Protista has been in general use I'm pretty sure for half a century. Wikipedia certainly says so, and Microsoft's >>>Encarta<<< likewise reports some variant of Protista as being in common use for monocellular organisms starting in the 1930s. Protazoa have been almost uniformly been separated from animals in my experience.


_________________
* here for the nachos.


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

02 Apr 2009, 12:07 am

twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Sand wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty sure that paramecia aren't animals.


Then it's about time you changed your mind.

A paramecium is no more an animal than a tree or a piece of kelp is.


See http://101science.com/paramecium.htm

That classification system does not seem representative of the commonly used ones. It mentions in its own notes that contemporaneous systems oftentimes recognize Protista as a kingdom to itself, and, indeed, proposed modern classification schemes involve rather a few more "kingdoms" than even that. For one example, see here. In general, I have rarely heard protists included in the animal kingdom.


The prime difference between plants and animals is that plants have a cell wall which animals do not. Paramecia fall into the class of animals.

Even your own source lists fungi as neither plant nor animal; protista has existed for quite some time. Anyway, the cell wall argument is an "a priori" classification style, and is not sufficient to justify a classification as "natural" in and of itself at all. Nowadays, the approach tends to be more >>>clade<<< oriented.


All classification is a matter of grouping abstract characteristics. Protozoa have, in my experience, been placed under animals. I did not create the system.

Protista has been in general use I'm pretty sure for half a century. Wikipedia certainly says so, and Microsoft's >>>Encarta<<< likewise reports some variant of Protista as being in common use for monocellular organisms starting in the 1930s. Protazoa have been almost uniformly been separated from animals in my experience.


I studied biology with extensive microscopic experience with protozoa on the early 1940s and protozoa at that time were indicated under animals. Perhaps there has been extensive revision in classification since. I have noted that several of the contributors to this site display all the intellectual capability of plants so some major reclassification seems in order.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Apr 2009, 5:56 am

Sand wrote:
To speak of humans versus animals is like speaking of grasshoppers versus animals or paramecium versus animals. We are all animals.


That we are. We are version 5.0 of the hominidae. We are the smartest, baddest apes in The Monkey House. There is a good chance that our species will not exist in ten million year or even less.

ruveyn