Animals?
Nancy Lebovitz
to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
animals.
I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
(Victorian or earlier).
Has there been an actual shift?
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com 100 new slogans
I want to move to theory. Everything works in theory.
Dorothy J Heydt
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
>to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
>animals.
>
>I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
>only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
>used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
>(Victorian or earlier).
No, just variances in usage. Sounds as if you were used
to using "animal" as a synonym for "mammal". But
everything in the Animal Kingdom is an animal. A shark,
a mantis, a flatworm, a frog, a sea urchin....
If you take the word back to its roots it means
"anything that breathes." _Anima_, "breath, spirit,
soul, life."
And yes, sharks are fish, but cartilagineous rather than
bony fish.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
David Dyer-Bennet
> I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
> to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
> animals.
>
> I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
> only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
> used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
> (Victorian or earlier).
>
> Has there been an actual shift?
I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
*I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd...@dd-b.net / New TMDA anti-spam in test
John Dyer-Bennet 1915-2002 Memorial Site http://john.dyer-bennet.net
Book log: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/Ouroboros/booknotes/
New Dragaera mailing lists, see http://dragaera.info
G EddieA95
>everything in the Animal Kingdom is an animal. A shark,
>a mantis, a flatworm, a frog, a sea urchin....
And even things that don't move, like sponges.
>
>If you take the word back to its roots it means
>"anything that breathes." _Anima_, "breath, spirit,
>soul, life."
Yes, that's the one common factor of animals. They don't have photosynthesis,
so they must "breathe" in some manner to obtain life.
Therese
b.net) says...
> I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
> *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
> been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
Bacteria, Protozoa, Fungi, Animalia, Vege[mutters latin-sounding stuff],
if not those blue-green algae have gotten their own, and virus a bit on
the side...
--
Therese Wikström
Dorothy J Heydt
David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>
>I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
>Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
>*I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
>been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name
of the other three but they're all little one- or fewer-
celled guys.
Darkhawk (H. Nicoll)
> In article <m27kkka...@gw.dd-b.net>,
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
> >
> >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
> >*I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
> >been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
>
> There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name
> of the other three but they're all little one- or fewer-
> celled guys.
Monera, protista, and. . . hell, I think it may be something for fungi.
I think the difference between monera and protista is whether or not
they have a cell nucleus.
- Darkhawk, shaking her head to see if anything falls out
--
Heather Anne Nicoll - Darkhawk - http://aelfhame.net/~darkhawk/
And if love remains, though everything is lost
We will pay the price, but we will not count the cost.
- "Bravado", Rush
Del Cotter
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> said:
>I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
>only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
>used to be insects.
Sharks are sharks, which are fish, which are animals. Preying mantises
are insects, which are arthropods, which are animals too. Dogs is dogs,
which is mammals, which is also animals.
But that there turtle is a *hinsect*^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
It's been common these last couple of centuries to describe as "animals"
what used to be called "beasts", ie. mammals. But if it's not a plant,
the chances are it's an animal. Sharks are members of the animal
kingdom, as are all the fish, insects, clams etc.
--
. . . . Del Cotter d...@branta.demon.co.uk . . . .
JustRead:e:TerryPratchettTheTruth:JeromeKJeromeThreeMenInABoat:WilliamGo
ldmanThePrincessBride:AlastairReynoldsRevelationSpace:GregEganQuarantine
ToRead:KimStanleyRobinsonTheYearsOfRice&Salt:BenJeapesHisMajesty'sStarsh
Ray Radlein
>
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
> >
> >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom
> >when *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know
> >they've been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
>
> There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the other
> three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
Slime Molds, and Calontir.
No, wait. The *Six* Kingdoms are Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
- Ray R.
--
***********************************************************************
"Nero? Galba? Otho? Vitellius? All jerks. 'Nuff said."
- Taciturn, "Histories" 1:1
Ray Radlein - r...@learnlink.emory.edu
homepage coming soon! wooo, wooo.
***********************************************************************
Ailsa Ek
rayra...@earthlink.net wrote:
> The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> Slime Molds, and Calontir.
>
> No, wait. The *Six* Kingdoms are Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
>
> No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
> entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
> Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
> Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
>
Have I mentioned lately how very glad I am you exist?
--
The anguish of the world is on my tongue. http://pages.ivillage.com/ailsaek/
My bowl is filled to the brim with it; ail...@mac.com
there is more than I can eat. - Edna St. Vincent Millay Ailsa C. Ek
This is a season . . . And all seasons pass. - Martha Manning Sharon, MA
David Dyer-Bennet
> In article <m27kkka...@gw.dd-b.net>,
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
> >
> >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
> >*I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
> >been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
>
> There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name
> of the other three but they're all little one- or fewer-
> celled guys.
Deciding where to put the one-cells and the fungi always seemed kinda
arbitrary, so I haven't minded them getting their own TLD; it doesn't
break any important synapses in my head.
Dorothy J Heydt
Ray Radlein <rayra...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>
>> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
>> >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom
>> >when *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know
>> >they've been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
>>
>> There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the other
>> three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
>
>The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
>Slime Molds, and Calontir.
>
>No, wait. The *Six* Kingdoms are Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
>Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
>
>No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
>entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
>Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
>Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
Don't forget Lochac.
(Note for the bemused: Lochac is the Australian branch
of the SCA, due to become an independent Kingdom weekend
after next.)
Vicki Rosenzweig
+0100:
>
>It's been common these last couple of centuries to describe as "animals"
>what used to be called "beasts", ie. mammals. But if it's not a plant,
>the chances are it's an animal. Sharks are members of the animal
>kingdom, as are all the fish, insects, clams etc.
Chances are it's neither--fungi and bacteria, for example, are not
plants or animals.
But most of the things you'll notice, yes, are either plants or
animals.
--
Vicki Rosenzweig | v...@redbird.org
r.a.sf.f faq at http://www.redbird.org/rassef-faq.html
Priscilla Ballou
> na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) writes:
>
> > I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
> > to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
> > animals.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
> > only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
> > used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
> > (Victorian or earlier).
> >
> > Has there been an actual shift?
>
> I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
That's only for 20 questions.
> Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
> *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
> been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
Priscilla
--
"Love is not something wonderful that you feel; it is something
difficult that you do." -- Elizabeth Goudge
Avram Grumer
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> In article <m27kkka...@gw.dd-b.net>,
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>
> >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom
> >when *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know
> >they've been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
>
> There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the other
> three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
Animalia, Plantae, Fungi, Protista, Monera. The monera are prokaryotic
(lacking a nucleus or other organelles), the others are all eukaryotic.
I think all of the eukaryotic kingdoms have at least some multi-cellular
members. I think kelp has been moved over into protista.
--
Avram Grumer | av...@grumer.org | http://www.PigsAndFishes.org
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to
stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile,
but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt
Kip Williams
> I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
> to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
> animals.
>
> I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
> only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
> used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
> (Victorian or earlier).
>
> Has there been an actual shift?
It's the lawyers. Sharks sued for animalhood in the late 80s.
Mantises are actually still in the early stages of petitioning for
official animalhood, but some people refer to them as animals
already, as a courtesy.
Hail ants!
--
--Kip (Williams) ...at members.cox.net/kipw
"Well, it looks as though my time is up. The old clock on the wall
has melted." --Hugh "Wavy Gravy" Romney
Kip Williams
> In article <m27kkka...@gw.dd-b.net>,
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>
>>I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
>>Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
>>*I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
>>been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
>
>
> There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name
> of the other three but they're all little one- or fewer-
> celled guys.
Fewer than one? They must be pretty small.
Kevin J. Maroney
wrote:
>Quoth Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> on Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:22:20
>+0100:
>>It's been common these last couple of centuries to describe as "animals"
>>what used to be called "beasts", ie. mammals. But if it's not a plant,
>>the chances are it's an animal. Sharks are members of the animal
>>kingdom, as are all the fish, insects, clams etc.
>
>Chances are it's neither--fungi and bacteria, for example, are not
>plants or animals.
I will take this opportunity to point out, as I do occasionally, that
by any reasonable biological measure, fungi are much more similar to
animals than to plants, and furthermore that plants, animals, and
fungi are all much more similar to each other than any of them are to
bacteria.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | k...@panix.com
Games are my entire waking life.
Thomas Yan
> Deciding where to put the one-cells and the fungi always seemed kinda
> arbitrary, so I haven't minded them getting their own TLD; it doesn't
> break any important synapses in my head.
I first got TLD confused with TLA, so it first appeared to me as Three
Letter Domain, until I realized it was probably Top-Level Domain.
Nancy Lebovitz
Paul Ciszek <pci...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>
>Archaea look like bacteria, but are different on a fundamental chemical level.
> Some live in undersea volcanic vents, some in nuclear reactors, and
> some like to eat minerals like iron pyrite. They use the left-handed
> forms of some molecules that everything else on earth uses the right-
> handed version of. Because they have been found living *inside of
> rock*, some people think they may permeate the Earth's crust and
> therefore constitute the majority of the living matter on this planet.
> And they weren't discovered until about 1980.
>
>Bacteria, you already know about.
>
>Eukaryota contains every cell with a nucleus. Animals, Plants, Fungi,
> Rhodophyta (stuff like kelp that functions like a plant, but doesn't
> have chlorplasts), slime molds, the various algaes, are all kingdoms
> under Eukaryota
>
Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage without
nuclii?
Therese
(na...@unix1.netaxs.com) says...
> Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage without
> nuclii?
They're much simpler. For example, proteins are made from RNA that's
still being transcribed, hence they don't use splicing.
Nuclei are practical, but not necessary. Mitochondria, on the other
hand, are needed for an organism our size.
--
Therese Wikström
Ross Smith
>
> It's worse than that-- they had to back up and make up something more
> fundamental than kingdoms. There are three *domains*:
And here was me thinking David was joking about TLDs.
Maybe they should just assign each species an IP address and be dome
with it.
--
Ross Smith ..................................... Auckland, New Zealand
r-s...@ihug.co.nz ...................................................
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers."
-- Serious Sam
Kevin J. Maroney
Lebovitz) wrote:
>Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage without
>nuclii?
Pretty darn well. Actually, the cell nucleus is one of the less
important organelle structures. Prokaryotic DNA just floats in the
cytoplasm, being transcribed by mRNA which then floats over to rRNA
for protein synthesis. In eukaryotes, the mRNA has to leave the cell
nucleus before it can reach the rRNA.
This is why plasmids work: The chemicals which lead to protein
synthesis just float around loose in the cytoplasm of the prokaryote,
so when a plasmid enters the cell, it starts sythesizing proteins more
or less immediately.
I can't remember: Do all eukaryotes have mitochondria?
Dorothy J Heydt
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage without
>nuclii?
Even the relatively low-level one-or-fewer-celled
organisms we've been talking about are in fact complex
arrays of organelles that perform various biochemical
functions. In eukaryotes, many of the functions have
been gathered together into a nucleus, instead of being
scattered through the organism.
David Dyer-Bennet
And, after all, the traditional ones *were* three-letter domains for
quite a while, until the country codes and then the new longer ones
came in.
David Dyer-Bennet
> In article <GyDr...@kithrup.com>,
> Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
> >In article <m27kkka...@gw.dd-b.net>,
> >David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> >>Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom when
> >>*I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know they've
> >>been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
> >
> >There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name
> >of the other three but they're all little one- or fewer-
> >celled guys.
>
> It's worse than that-- they had to back up and make up something more
> fundamental than kingdoms. There are three *domains*:
>
> Archaea look like bacteria, but are different on a fundamental chemical level.
> Some live in undersea volcanic vents, some in nuclear reactors, and
> some like to eat minerals like iron pyrite. They use the left-handed
> forms of some molecules that everything else on earth uses the right-
> handed version of. Because they have been found living *inside of
> rock*, some people think they may permeate the Earth's crust and
> therefore constitute the majority of the living matter on this planet.
> And they weren't discovered until about 1980.
>
> Bacteria, you already know about.
>
> Eukaryota contains every cell with a nucleus. Animals, Plants, Fungi,
> Rhodophyta (stuff like kelp that functions like a plant, but doesn't
> have chlorplasts), slime molds, the various algaes, are all kingdoms
> under Eukaryota
>
> You can spend entirely too much time browsing around the Tree of Life online.
> The root of the tree can be found at
> http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/alllife/threedomains.html
Oooh, excellently cool. Thanks!
Jay Denebeim
Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
>I will take this opportunity to point out, as I do occasionally, that
>by any reasonable biological measure, fungi are much more similar to
>animals than to plants, and furthermore that plants, animals, and
>fungi are all much more similar to each other than any of them are to
>bacteria.
Actually, I don't think I agree with this. I think you could classify
plants and animals as large colonies of bacteria that happen to really
get along together. Fungus is very different though, and Virii are
very, very different.
Jay
--
* Jay Denebeim Moderator rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated *
* newsgroup submission address: b5...@deepthot.org *
* moderator contact address: b5mod-...@deepthot.org *
* personal contact address: dene...@deepthot.org *
Patrick Connors
> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >
> > David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> > >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom
> > >when *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know
> > >they've been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
> >
> > There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the other
> > three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
>
> The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> Slime Molds, and Calontir.
>
> No, wait. The *Six* Kingdoms are Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
>
> No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
> entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
> Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
> Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
>
Rasseff Award (Blazon: Azure, between two palm-trees Or, a dead parrot
rampant proper), presented with comfy chair and a nice cup of tea.
- Patrick Connors, occasional denizen of flaming Atenveldt
Vicki Rosenzweig
>In article <pufnhu09vpu962lhu...@4ax.com>,
>Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>I will take this opportunity to point out, as I do occasionally, that
>>by any reasonable biological measure, fungi are much more similar to
>>animals than to plants, and furthermore that plants, animals, and
>>fungi are all much more similar to each other than any of them are to
>>bacteria.
>
>Actually, I don't think I agree with this. I think you could classify
>plants and animals as large colonies of bacteria that happen to really
>get along together. Fungus is very different though, and Virii are
>very, very different.
The last I saw, fungus was closer to animals than either is to plants.
And all three are very closely related, compared to much of the rest of
what lives on this planet.
Viruses are debatably alive at all.
And--as a member of the newly formed Rassef Academie Anglaise, I would
like to point out that "virii" is not the plural of "virus" or, as far
as I know, of any English word.
Dorothy J Heydt
Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
>
>Viruses are debatably alive at all.
>
>And--as a member of the newly formed Rassef Academie Anglaise, I would
>like to point out that "virii" is not the plural of "virus" or, as far
>as I know, of any English word.
Nor in Latin. The Latin plural (I looked it up) would be
viri; it's a second-declension noun but in spite of having
a nominative in -us it is neuter.
Amy Gray
r...@learnlink.emory.edu uttered...
> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >
> > David Dyer-Bennet <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >I thought the great division was animal, vegetable, or mineral.
> > >Sharks and and insects were certainly part of the animal kingdom
> > >when *I* studied biology back in highschool, too. (Yes, I know
> > >they've been revamping the high-level structures there since then.)
> >
> > There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the other
> > three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
>
> The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> Slime Molds, and Calontir.
Long Live The King.
--
Amy Gray (Who, despite the .uk, lives in Forgotten Sea, of Calontir)
ag...@arkane.demon.co.uk
UIN: 91047322
Dorothy J Heydt
Amy Gray <ag...@arkane.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <3D1B7BEA...@learnlink.emory.edu>,
>r...@learnlink.emory.edu uttered...
>>
>> Slime Molds, and Calontir.
>
>Long Live The King.
"How many Calontiri does it take to light a candle?"
"Three hundred and twenty-five, and you should SEE the
CEREMONY!"
Keith F. Lynch
> Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage
> without nuclii?
Basically, they *are* cell nuclei. You should ask how they manage
without chloroplasts, mitochondria, etc.
Presumably, eukaryotes evolved out of bacteria or other prokaryotes,
perhaps a billion years ago, when some prokaryote swallowed another
and didn't digest it, but kept it as a symbiote. Cell nuclei
in eukaryotes are akin to prokaryotes, as are chloroplasts and
mitochondria in eukaryotes.
All plants, animals, and fungi are composed of eukaryotes. Many
single-celled beings are also eukaryotes.
--
Keith F. Lynch - k...@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.
Ray Radlein
>
> r...@learnlink.emory.edu uttered...
> > Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > >
> > > There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the
> > > other three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
> >
> > The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria,
> > Fungi, Slime Molds, and Calontir.
>
> Long Live The King.
>
> --
> Amy Gray (Who, despite the .uk, lives in Forgotten Sea, of Calontir)
I'm just glad you're not upset that I listed Calontir *after* Slime
Molds.
Katie Schwarz
No, some have lost them, and a few may never have had them.
Mitochondria are for oxygen respiration. In an anoxic environment they
are not needed. The infamous Giardia parasite is a eukaryote without
mitochondria. (Google "eukaryotes without mitochondria" was remarkably
helpful.)
What I want to know is whether there are any eukaryote species without
sexual reproduction. Paired linear chromosomes vs. a single circular
one seems like a much bigger gap than just acquiring some organelles
and a nuclear membrane.
--
Katie Schwarz
"There's no need to look for a Chimera, or a cat with three legs."
-- Jorge Luis Borges, "Death and the Compass"
Mary Kay
>
> And--as a member of the newly formed Rassef Academie Anglaise,
Is there an entrance exam? Or is it like fwa?
MKK
Irina Rempt
> Nor in Latin. The Latin plural (I looked it up) would be
> viri; it's a second-declension noun but in spite of having
> a nominative in -us it is neuter.
Is it the only neuter second-declension noun with a nominative in -us?
It looks like fourth declension to me (which would have the plural in
-us, with long u).
Irina
--
Vesta veran, terna puran, farenin. http://www.valdyas.org/irina
Beginnen can ick, volherden wil ick, volbringhen sal ick.
Dorothy J Heydt
Irina Rempt <ir...@valdyas.org> wrote:
>On Saturday 29 June 2002 01:05 Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
>> Nor in Latin. The Latin plural (I looked it up) would be
>> viri; it's a second-declension noun but in spite of having
>> a nominative in -us it is neuter.
>
>Is it the only neuter second-declension noun with a nominative in -us?
>It looks like fourth declension to me (which would have the plural in
>-us, with long u).
That's what I expected it to be, but that's not what I
fought in my dictionary (Lewis and Short, the really
really big Latin-English dictionary, four inches thick,
cost a bundle thirty years ago). virus, -i, n. And
some examples showing that the singular accusative is
also virus, same as the nominative, which is what you'd
expect of a neuter noun, you just don't expect it to end
in -us.
Primary meaning, by the way, is "slime." Secondary
meaning, "poison."
Irina Rempt
> In article <1350186.G...@calcifer.valdyas.org>,
> Irina Rempt <ir...@valdyas.org> wrote:
>>It looks like fourth declension to me (which would have the plural in
>>-us, with long u).
>
> That's what I expected it to be, but that's not what I
> fought in my dictionary (Lewis and Short, the really
> really big Latin-English dictionary, four inches thick,
> cost a bundle thirty years ago). virus, -i, n.
Drat it, I don't *have* Lewis and Short and I want it.
<mad run upstairs for the Latin dictionaries> Of the two I've got, both
say it's neuter, one gives "-i" and one "[sign meaning non-classical]
-us" for the genitive, neither mentions what declension though -i would
make it second and -us fourth, of course, and neither mentions the
plural at all. I'd expect the plural to be "vira" (never mind the -us)
in the second declension, and "virus" (with long u) in the fourth,
though I can't think of any (other) neuter nouns in the fourth
declension at all.
Kathy Routliffe
>
> > The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> > Slime Molds, and Calontir.
> >
> > Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
> >
> > No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
> > entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
> > Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
> > Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
> >
Too right. I missed him when he was gone.
--
Kathy R.
---------------------------
If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion
galaxies, you will not find another.
-- Carl Sagan
David Goldfarb
>viri; it's a second-declension noun but in spite of having
>a nominative in -us it is neuter.
My little Cassell's agrees with you regarding declension and gender;
but if it's neuter, wouldn't the plural be "vira"?
--
David Goldfarb <*>| "I am an atheist, myself. A simple faith, but
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | a great comfort to me in these last days."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- Lois McMaster Bujold, _Shards of Honor_
Arthur D. Hlavaty
wrote:
>The last I saw, fungus was closer to animals than either is to plants.
Interesting that we're also discussing substituting portabellas for
burgers.
--
Arthur D.Hlavaty hla...@panix.com
Church of the SuperGenius in Wile E. we trust
E-zine available on request
Kip Williams
> Ailsa Ek wrote:
>
>>In article <3D1B7BEA...@learnlink.emory.edu>,
>>rayra...@earthlink.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
>>>Slime Molds, and Calontir.
>>>
>>>No, wait. The *Six* Kingdoms are Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
>>>Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
>>>
>>>No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
>>>entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
>>>Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
>>>Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
>>>
>>
>>Have I mentioned lately how very glad I am you exist?
>
>
> Too right. I missed him when he was gone.
He's like some sort of unit of sunshine, kind of.
--
--Kip (Williams) ...at members.cox.net/kipw
"Well, it looks as though my time is up. The old clock on the wall
has melted." --Hugh "Wavy Gravy" Romney
Vicki Rosenzweig
>Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
>>
>> And--as a member of the newly formed Rassef Academie Anglaise,
>
>Is there an entrance exam? Or is it like fwa?
>
Well, Jo and I seem to have invented it. If that's a request,
I think you can consider yourself a member.
Vicki Rosenzweig
05:05:16 +0000 (UTC):
>Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
>>I can't remember: Do all eukaryotes have mitochondria?
>
>No, some have lost them, and a few may never have had them.
>Mitochondria are for oxygen respiration. In an anoxic environment they
>are not needed. The infamous Giardia parasite is a eukaryote without
>mitochondria. (Google "eukaryotes without mitochondria" was remarkably
>helpful.)
>
>What I want to know is whether there are any eukaryote species without
>sexual reproduction. Paired linear chromosomes vs. a single circular
>one seems like a much bigger gap than just acquiring some organelles
>and a nuclear membrane.
I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
http://microbiology.okstate.edu/faculty/hadwige/yeast.htm
Rob Wynne
>No, some have lost them, and a few may never have had them.
>Mitochondria are for oxygen respiration. In an anoxic environment they
>are not needed. The infamous Giardia parasite is a eukaryote without
>mitochondria. (Google "eukaryotes without mitochondria" was remarkably
>helpful.)
Y'know, (c'mon Dave, say it with me), "Eukaryotes Without Mitochondria"
would be a great name for a band. :)
-R
--
Rob Wynne / The Autographed Cat / d...@america.net
Gafilk 2003: Jan 10-12, 2003, Atlanta, GA -- http://www.gafilk.org/
Paul Dormer
na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
> I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
> to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
> animals.
>
> I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
> only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
> used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
> (Victorian or earlier).
>
> Has there been an actual shift?
> --
Famous Punch cartoon (which I'm quoting from memory). A child is
attempting to take a pet on a train journey, and the ticket clerk is
looking it up: "Cats is dogs, and rabbits is dogs, but this 'ere tortoise
is an insect, and goes free."
Philip Armstrong
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage without
>nuclii?
The dna just floats around in the cytoplasm -- there's nothing about
the enzymes which transcribe DNA into RNA which requires separation
from the rest of the cell, not in bacteria anyway.
Phil
--
http://www.kantaka.co.uk/ .oOo. public key: http://www.kantaka.co.uk/gpg.txt
Dorothy J Heydt
Paul Dormer <pauld...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>Famous Punch cartoon (which I'm quoting from memory). A child is
>attempting to take a pet on a train journey, and the ticket clerk is
>looking it up: "Cats is dogs, and rabbits is dogs, but this 'ere tortoise
>is an insect, and goes free."
Sounds like a line from "Pigs Is Pigs."
Kip Williams
Pigs, however, is pigs.
Nancy Lebovitz
Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>> Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage
>> without nuclii?
>
>Basically, they *are* cell nuclei. You should ask how they manage
>without chloroplasts, mitochondria, etc.
>
>Presumably, eukaryotes evolved out of bacteria or other prokaryotes,
>perhaps a billion years ago, when some prokaryote swallowed another
>and didn't digest it, but kept it as a symbiote. Cell nuclei
>in eukaryotes are akin to prokaryotes, as are chloroplasts and
>mitochondria in eukaryotes.
>
>All plants, animals, and fungi are composed of eukaryotes. Many
>single-celled beings are also eukaryotes.
Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii. Actually (thank
you, google), birds, unlike most mammals, retain nuclii in their
adult blood cells.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com 100 new slogans
I want to move to theory. Everything works in theory.
Kip Williams
> In article <memo.20020629...@pauldormer.compulink.co.uk>,
> Paul Dormer <pauld...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Famous Punch cartoon (which I'm quoting from memory). A child is
>>attempting to take a pet on a train journey, and the ticket clerk is
>>looking it up: "Cats is dogs, and rabbits is dogs, but this 'ere tortoise
>>is an insect, and goes free."
>
>
> Sounds like a line from "Pigs Is Pigs."
Jinx! Buy me a coke. (Commences lengthy ritual...)
Nancy Lebovitz
>Famous Punch cartoon (which I'm quoting from memory). A child is
>attempting to take a pet on a train journey, and the ticket clerk is
>looking it up: "Cats is dogs, and rabbits is dogs, but this 'ere tortoise
>is an insect, and goes free."
I believe the tortoise is an hinsect, or possibly a hinsect.
Nancy Lebovitz
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
>to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
>animals.
>
>I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
>only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
>used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
>(Victorian or earlier).
>
>Has there been an actual shift?
Thanks for the discussion of biology--it's going along very nicely
and informatively, and will be about cats and chocolate and train
systems momentarily.
However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
animal ever sound odd to you?
Dorothy J Heydt
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>Thanks for the discussion of biology--it's going along very nicely
>and informatively, and will be about cats and chocolate and train
>systems momentarily.
>
>However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
>in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
>animal ever sound odd to you?
No.
Dorothy J Heydt
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>
>Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii. Actually (thank
>you, google), birds, unlike most mammals, retain nuclii in their
>adult blood cells.
They have nuclei while they are developing, and lose
them at maturity (they aren't expected to reproduce,
they're generated by other cells). So I think you can
call them eukaryotes, just as we call tunicates (sea
squirts) chordates, even though they lose the notochord
as adults.
aRJay
<na...@unix1.netaxs.com> writes
>In article <memo.20020629...@pauldormer.compulink.co.uk>,
>Paul Dormer <pauld...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Famous Punch cartoon (which I'm quoting from memory). A child is
>>attempting to take a pet on a train journey, and the ticket clerk is
>>looking it up: "Cats is dogs, and rabbits is dogs, but this 'ere tortoise
>>is an insect, and goes free."
>
>I believe the tortoise is an hinsect, or possibly a hinsect.
>
--
aRJay
"In this great and creatorless universe, where so much beautiful has
come to be out of the chance interactions of the basic properties of
matter, it seems so important that we love one another."
- Lucy Kemnitzer
Keith F. Lynch
> Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii.
Red blood corpuscles aren't even considered cells.
White blood cells have nuclei.
Keith F. Lynch
> However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
> in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
> animal ever sound odd to you?
Depends on the context.
I recently saw an article on "animal bites". As I expected, it made
no mention of insect or spider bites, even though literally speaking
those are the most common kind of animal bits that people suffer.
And the deadliest (thanks to malaria).
It didn't even mention snake bites. Nor sharks. It mostly said
things like go to a doctor if a cat bites you because those tiny
punctures are very deep and not very sterile.
Avram Grumer
Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
> I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
"Eukaryotes asexual" sounds like something from the end of a rhyming
line in a parody of "Modern Major General".
--
Avram Grumer / "There will never be
av...@grumer.org / a technology that beats
www.PigsAndFishes.org / having lunch..."
www.livejournal.com/users/agrumer/ -- Jakob Nielsen
Kevin J. Maroney
(Katie Schwarz) wrote:
>What I want to know is whether there are any eukaryote species without
>sexual reproduction. Paired linear chromosomes vs. a single circular
>one seems like a much bigger gap than just acquiring some organelles
>and a nuclear membrane.
There are arthropods without sexual reproduction, IIRC. But they have
pair chromosomes.
And I think the presence of organelles is a much bigger difference. As
I said, plasmids work because of the lack of certain organelles, and
plasmids make prokaryotic gene propagation very different from
eukaryotic.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | k...@panix.com
Games are my entire waking life.
Amy Gray
r...@learnlink.emory.edu uttered...
> Amy Gray wrote:
> >
> > r...@learnlink.emory.edu uttered...
> > > Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There are now I think five kingdoms, I forget the name of the
> > > > other three but they're all little one- or fewer- celled guys.
> > >
> > > The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria,
> > > Fungi, Slime Molds, and Calontir.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amy Gray (Who, despite the .uk, lives in Forgotten Sea, of Calontir)
>
> I'm just glad you're not upset that I listed Calontir *after* Slime
> Molds.
*snicker* No comment.
--
Amy Gray
ag...@arkane.demon.co.uk
UIN: 91047322
Avram Grumer
Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
> In article <e6hrhuoj415d78oct...@news.panix.com>,
> Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
>
> > I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
>
> "Eukaryotes asexual" sounds like something from the end of a rhyming
> line in a parody of "Modern Major General".
I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
Beth Friedman
Lebovitz), <n%kT8.181$d34.1...@monger.newsread.com>, wrote:
>However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
>in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
>animal ever sound odd to you?
A bit odd, but technically correct.
Um, it might be worth pointing out that it's actually a "praying
mantis" because of the appearance of prayer of its front legs. Though
of course it does prey upon other insects and arachnids.
--
Beth Friedman
b...@wavefront.com
Beth Friedman
<afkruu$av5$1...@panix1.panix.com>, wrote:
>Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>> Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii.
>
>Red blood corpuscles aren't even considered cells.
Certainly they are. They're called red blood cells, not red blood
corpuscles in normal use. They start out with nuclei, but lose them.
>White blood cells have nuclei.
True, and they're cells as well.
--
Beth Friedman
b...@wavefront.com
Mary Kay
> Quoth mar...@kare.ws (Mary Kay) on Fri, 28 Jun 2002 22:53:02 -0700:
>
> >Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> And--as a member of the newly formed Rassef Academie Anglaise,
> >
> >Is there an entrance exam? Or is it like fwa?
> >
> Well, Jo and I seem to have invented it. If that's a request,
> I think you can consider yourself a member.
Thank you. Thank you. Hmm. You know we need badges or buttons or
something. Hmm...
MKK
Del Cotter
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> said:
>Thanks for the discussion of biology--it's going along very nicely
>and informatively, and will be about cats and chocolate and train
>systems momentarily.
>
>However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
>in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
>animal ever sound odd to you?
No.
--
. . . . Del Cotter d...@branta.demon.co.uk . . . .
JustRead:e:TerryPratchettTheTruth:JeromeKJeromeThreeMenInABoat:WilliamGo
ldmanThePrincessBride:AlastairReynoldsRevelationSpace:GregEganQuarantine
ToRead:KimStanleyRobinsonTheYearsOfRice&Salt:BenJeapesHisMajesty'sStarsh
Del Cotter
>Kathy Routliffe wrote:
>>>Have I mentioned lately how very glad I am you exist?
>>
>> Too right. I missed him when he was gone.
>
>He's like some sort of unit of sunshine, kind of.
A Radlein? I thought I knew all the units, that one must be pretty
obscure...
Kathy Routliffe
>
> Kathy Routliffe wrote:
> > Ailsa Ek wrote:
> >
> >>In article <3D1B7BEA...@learnlink.emory.edu>,
> >>rayra...@earthlink.net wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>The Five Kingdoms are, I believe, Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi,
> >>>Slime Molds, and Calontir.
> >>>
> >>>Slime Molds, Calontir, Fear, and Surprise.
> >>>
> >>>No, that's not it, either -- okay. *Among* the Kingdoms are such diverse
> >>>entries as Animals, Vegetables, Bacteria, Fungi, Slime Molds, Calontir,
> >>>Fear, Surprise, Atenveldt, An Tir, Ruthless Determination, and a
> >>>Fanatical Devotion to the Pope.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Have I mentioned lately how very glad I am you exist?
> >
> >
> > Too right. I missed him when he was gone.
>
> He's like some sort of unit of sunshine, kind of.
So are you.
--
Kathy R.
---------------------------
If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion
galaxies, you will not find another.
-- Carl Sagan
Kevin J. Maroney
Lebovitz) wrote:
>Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii. Actually (thank
>you, google), birds, unlike most mammals, retain nuclii in their
>adult blood cells.
Red blood cells are properly called "corpuscles" because mature red
blood corpuscles are not well-formed cells.
Katie Schwarz
>On Saturday 29 June 2002 01:05 Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> Nor in Latin. The Latin plural (I looked it up) would be
>> viri; it's a second-declension noun but in spite of having
>> a nominative in -us it is neuter.
>
>Is it the only neuter second-declension noun with a nominative in -us?
>It looks like fourth declension to me (which would have the plural in
>-us, with long u).
This web page looks pretty definitive:
http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html
"Anyway, Latin already had a word viri, but it was the nominative
plural not of virus (slime, poison, or venom), but of vir (man), which
as it turns out is also a 2nd declension noun. ... *Virii is still
completely silly, so don't do that; otherwise, everyone will know
you're just a blathering script kiddie.
"The crucial problem here is that, classically speaking, there appears
to be no recorded use of virus in the plural. It was a 2nd declension
noun ending in -us, which is rather common, but it was also a neuter,
which is rather rare. I could only come up with three such 2nd
declension neuters: virus (some poison), pelagus (the sea, usually
poetically), and vulgus (the crowd). None appear to admit plurals.
Perhaps this is because they are mass nouns, not count nouns."
--
Katie Schwarz
"There's no need to look for a Chimera, or a cat with three legs."
-- Jorge Luis Borges, "Death and the Compass"
Jordin Kare
> Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
> > I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
> > to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
> > animals.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
> > only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
> > used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
> > (Victorian or earlier).
> >
> > Has there been an actual shift?
>
> It's the lawyers. Sharks sued for animalhood in the late 80s.
I thought that was when sharks tried to get into organized crime:
"You can't threaten us! We *already* sleep with the fishes!"
> Mantises are actually still in the early stages of petitioning for
> official animalhood,
Unfortunately, the only ones who qualify are the ones who are strongly
magnetized. The others have been ruled non-compass mantis.
> Hail ants!
Better than raining cats and dogs, I suppose...
--
Jordin Kare
"Point and click" means you're out of ammo.
Nancy Lebovitz
Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>In article <avram-048DA5....@reader2.panix.com>,
> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <e6hrhuoj415d78oct...@news.panix.com>,
>> Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
>>
>> "Eukaryotes asexual" sounds like something from the end of a rhyming
>> line in a parody of "Modern Major General".
>
>I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
>My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
>I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
>And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
Nancy Lebovitz
Kevin J. Maroney <k...@panix.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 16:07:45 GMT, na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy
>Lebovitz) wrote:
>>Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii. Actually (thank
>>you, google), birds, unlike most mammals, retain nuclii in their
>>adult blood cells.
>
>Red blood cells are properly called "corpuscles" because mature red
>blood corpuscles are not well-formed cells.
There seems to be some disagreement on the point. When you say "properly",
do you mean that they aren't called cells in journal articles, or
that they shouldn't be, or what?
Is the lack of nuclii the only way that they fail to be well-formed?
This begins to sound like kashrut to me--if a fish has scales when
young but loses them as an adult, is it kosher?
My only conclusion so far is that biology snickers at our classifications.
Mary Kay
>
> Unfortunately, the only ones who qualify are the ones who are strongly
> magnetized. The others have been ruled non-compass mantis.
>
Ow! Ow! Ow! Just remember, you have to go to sleep sometime.
MKK
Mary Kay
> In article <avram-048DA5....@reader2.panix.com>,
> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>
> > In article <e6hrhuoj415d78oct...@news.panix.com>,
> > Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
> >
> > "Eukaryotes asexual" sounds like something from the end of a rhyming
> > line in a parody of "Modern Major General".
>
> I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
> My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
> I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
> And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
You guys have to stop this. I'm giving out too many rasff awards! This
is *so* good. Have one anyway.
MKK
Mary Kay
> Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
> > However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
> > in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
> > animal ever sound odd to you?
>
> Depends on the context.
>
> I recently saw an article on "animal bites". As I expected, it made
> no mention of insect or spider bites, even though literally speaking
> those are the most common kind of animal bits that people suffer.
> And the deadliest (thanks to malaria).
>
> It didn't even mention snake bites. Nor sharks. It mostly said
> things like go to a doctor if a cat bites you because those tiny
> punctures are very deep and not very sterile.
Very very non sterile. At the emergency room they insisted on giving me
IV antibiotics and you should see what they've got me taking orally.
Horse pills! Cat bites are probably not as bad as human bites but only
just barely.
MKK
Mary Kay
> In article <avram-7E5C9A....@reader2.panix.com>,
> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
> >In article <avram-048DA5....@reader2.panix.com>,
> > Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <e6hrhuoj415d78oct...@news.panix.com>,
> >> Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
> >>
> >> "Eukaryotes asexual" sounds like something from the end of a rhyming
> >> line in a parody of "Modern Major General".
> >
> >I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
> >My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
> >I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
> >And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
>
> Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
Want!
MKK
Robert Sneddon
<mar...@kare.ws> writes
>
>Very very non sterile. At the emergency room they insisted on giving me
>IV antibiotics and you should see what they've got me taking orally.
>Horse pills!
Heh. One convention I had a headache and asked around if anyone had any
Ibuprofen. Somebody pointed me at Anne Whittaker (nee Rundle, a FoN) and
she produced these *gigantic* pills which were 1000 mg dosage Ibuprofen.
Anne is a vet, and these were real horse pills. Worked a treat.
--
Robert Sneddon nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
Amy Gray
uttered...
> On Sat, 29 Jun 2002 16:07:45 GMT, na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy
> Lebovitz) wrote:
> >Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii. Actually (thank
> >you, google), birds, unlike most mammals, retain nuclii in their
> >adult blood cells.
>
> Red blood cells are properly called "corpuscles" because mature red
> blood corpuscles are not well-formed cells.
Medical Center refer to them as "red cells".
Ailsa Ek
> In article <avram-7E5C9A....@reader2.panix.com>,
> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
> >
> >I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
> >My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
> >I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
> >And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
>
> Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
If you do, I'll buy one.
--
The anguish of the world is on my tongue. http://pages.ivillage.com/ailsaek/
My bowl is filled to the brim with it; ail...@mac.com
there is more than I can eat. - Edna St. Vincent Millay Ailsa C. Ek
This is a season . . . And all seasons pass. - Martha Manning Sharon, MA
Priscilla Ballou
Ailsa Ek <ail...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article <asqT8.1043$mp2.7...@newshog.newsread.com>,
> na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
> > In article <avram-7E5C9A....@reader2.panix.com>,
> > Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
> > >My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
> > >I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
> > >And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
> >
> > Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
>
> If you do, I'll buy one.
Speaking of buttons, I was chatting with the Bestower of the Sacred 50
Minute Hour last week, and at one point I said, "That's the nice thing
about denial -- it works!" and then I said, "I should offer that to
Nancy -- 'Denial -- it works!' or something like that."
Priscilla
--
"Love is not something wonderful that you feel; it is something
difficult that you do." -- Elizabeth Goudge
Avram Grumer
na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
> In article <avram-7E5C9A....@reader2.panix.com>,
> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
> >
> >I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
> >My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
> >I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
> >And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
>
> Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
Not at all.
Kip Williams
> In article <avram-048DA5....@reader2.panix.com>,
> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <e6hrhuoj415d78oct...@news.panix.com>,
>> Vicki Rosenzweig <v...@redbird.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I did another quick google (on "eukaryote asexual") and found yeast:
>>
>>"Eukaryotes asexual" sounds like something from the end of a rhyming
>>line in a parody of "Modern Major General".
>
>
> I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
> My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
> I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
> And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
You are the man.
--
--Kip (Williams) ...at members.cox.net/kipw
"Well, it looks as though my time is up. The old clock on the wall
has melted." --Hugh "Wavy Gravy" Romney
D. Potter
> Kip Williams <ki...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
[snippage]
>>Mantises are actually still in the early stages of petitioning for
>>official animalhood,
>
>
> Unfortunately, the only ones who qualify are the ones who are strongly
> magnetized. The others have been ruled non-compass mantis.
>
<yell>
Mary Kaaaaaaaaayy!
</yell>
--
D.
shuddering
Nancy Lebovitz
Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>In article <asqT8.1043$mp2.7...@newshog.newsread.com>,
> na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
>
>> In article <avram-7E5C9A....@reader2.panix.com>,
>> Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
>> >My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
>> >I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
>> >And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
>>
>> Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
>
>Not at all.
Many thanks--and it might be a way to recruit people who'd like
the newsgroup.
Andrew Plotkin
> "The crucial problem here is that, classically speaking, there appears
> to be no recorded use of virus in the plural. It was a 2nd declension
> noun ending in -us, which is rather common, but it was also a neuter,
> which is rather rare. I could only come up with three such 2nd
> declension neuters: virus (some poison), pelagus (the sea, usually
> poetically), and vulgus (the crowd). None appear to admit plurals.
> Perhaps this is because they are mass nouns, not count nouns."
A-*ha*!
That makes sense.
(Problem is, in English you *can* make plurals of mass nouns, usually
to indicate different types.)
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
* Make your vote count. Get your vote counted.
Cally Soukup
> Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
> Want!
Ook! Oook ook OOOK!
--
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend
to the death your right to say it." -- Beatrice Hall
Cally Soukup sou...@pobox.com
Mary Kay
Hey, if I could stop him don't you think I'd have done that by now?
However, as I mentioned earlier, he's got to sleep sometime. I'll just
quietly smother him. I trust you'll corroborate my alibi.
MKK
David G. Bell
no...@nospam.demon.co.uk "Robert Sneddon" wrote:
> In article <1fejrgg.1q7xqx1qmn495N%mar...@kare.ws>, Mary Kay
> <mar...@kare.ws> writes
> >
> >Very very non sterile. At the emergency room they insisted on giving me
> >IV antibiotics and you should see what they've got me taking orally.
> >Horse pills!
>
> Heh. One convention I had a headache and asked around if anyone had any
> Ibuprofen. Somebody pointed me at Anne Whittaker (nee Rundle, a FoN) and
> she produced these *gigantic* pills which were 1000 mg dosage Ibuprofen.
> Anne is a vet, and these were real horse pills. Worked a treat.
I don't know if it's still true, but I was once told (by somebody other
than Anne) that a vet could legally treat a human, while a doctor wasn't
allowed to treat an animal (for similar non-trivial values of treat).
Makes sense -- there's a lot of differences between species, and if you
only know about the one...
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
Mr. Punch's Advice to a Young Man About to Become a Farmer:
"Marry, instead."
Mike Scott
("David G. Bell") wrote:
>I don't know if it's still true, but I was once told (by somebody other
>than Anne) that a vet could legally treat a human, while a doctor wasn't
>allowed to treat an animal (for similar non-trivial values of treat).
>
>Makes sense -- there's a lot of differences between species, and if you
>only know about the one...
It makes sense another way. A human being has the option to say "You're
a vet, not a doctor -- get the hell away from me". An animal has no such
option.
--
Mike Scott
mi...@plokta.com
aRJay
<mar...@kare.ws> writes
fans.
--
aRJay
"In this great and creatorless universe, where so much beautiful has
come to be out of the chance interactions of the basic properties of
matter, it seems so important that we love one another."
- Lucy Kemnitzer
Nancy Lebovitz
Arthur D. Hlavaty
<vze2...@verizon.net> wrote:
>In article <ailsaek-5AE617...@netnews.attbi.com>,
> Ailsa Ek <ail...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <asqT8.1043$mp2.7...@newshog.newsread.com>,
>> na...@unix1.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote:
>> > In article <avram-7E5C9A....@reader2.panix.com>,
>> > Avram Grumer <av...@grumer.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >I am the very model of a modern rasseffarian,
>> > >My politics are complex and apparently contrarian,
>> > >I quote the laws of kashrut even when they're non-contextual,
>> > >And rattle off the names of the eukaryotes asexual.
>> >
>> > Avram, do you mind if I do that up as a button?
>>
>> If you do, I'll buy one.
>
>Speaking of buttons, I was chatting with the Bestower of the Sacred 50
>Minute Hour last week, and at one point I said, "That's the nice thing
>about denial -- it works!" and then I said, "I should offer that to
>Nancy -- 'Denial -- it works!' or something like that."
I prefer "Denial: your road to peace of mind."
--
Arthur D.Hlavaty hla...@panix.com
Church of the SuperGenius in Wile E. we trust
E-zine available on request
Kip Williams
Just drop a hint. Were you at the sushi roast with Geri, or shooting
rats down at the dump with Mike, or poisoning pigeons in the park
with us?
Dorothy J Heydt
David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.org.uk> wrote:
>
>I don't know if it's still true, but I was once told (by somebody other
>than Anne) that a vet could legally treat a human, while a doctor wasn't
>allowed to treat an animal (for similar non-trivial values of treat).
>
I have a friend in the SCA who, after studying
diligently, passed her exams several years ago and is
now a qualified vet. The joke told at the time was,
"Now she is qualified to treat fighters!"
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Mary Kay
> On Sunday, in article <qzvOmQBh...@nojay.fsnet.co.uk>
> no...@nospam.demon.co.uk "Robert Sneddon" wrote:
>
> > In article <1fejrgg.1q7xqx1qmn495N%mar...@kare.ws>, Mary Kay
> > <mar...@kare.ws> writes
> > >
> > >Very very non sterile. At the emergency room they insisted on giving me
> > >IV antibiotics and you should see what they've got me taking orally.
> > >Horse pills!
> >
> > Heh. One convention I had a headache and asked around if anyone had any
> > Ibuprofen. Somebody pointed me at Anne Whittaker (nee Rundle, a FoN) and
> > she produced these *gigantic* pills which were 1000 mg dosage Ibuprofen.
> > Anne is a vet, and these were real horse pills. Worked a treat.
>
> I don't know if it's still true, but I was once told (by somebody other
> than Anne) that a vet could legally treat a human, while a doctor wasn't
> allowed to treat an animal (for similar non-trivial values of treat).
>
> Makes sense -- there's a lot of differences between species, and if you
> only know about the one...
And at least at one time, it was harder to get into vet school than med
school. More applicants per space.
MKK
Michael J. Lowrey
>
> In article <IZHS8.838$mp2.4...@newshog.newsread.com>,
> Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
> >I just heard a radio interview with Peter Benchley in which he referred
> >to sharks as "animals", and I've recently seen praying mantises called
> >animals.
> >
> >I'm pretty sure that sharks used to be sharks (or possibly fish, but
> >only if one was willing to risk getting corrected) and preying mantises
> >used to be insects. Referring to an insect as an animal seemed quaint
> >(Victorian or earlier).
> >
> >Has there been an actual shift?
>
> Thanks for the discussion of biology--it's going along very nicely
> and informatively, and will be about cats and chocolate and train
> systems momentarily.
>
> However, what I was curious about was whether there's been a change
> in common language use. Did hearing a preying mantis called an
> animal ever sound odd to you?
I spent my youth in the South, and have lived in Chicago
(briefly) and Milwaukee for over a quarter-century.
At no time do I recall running into a usage of the term
"animal" which excluded fish and insects.
Just a data point.
--
Orange Mike
knows people who object to hearing HUMANS termed "animals"
Bernard Peek
<na...@unix1.netaxs.com> writes
>
>Are blood cells eukaryotes? They don't have nuclii. Actually (thank
>you, google), birds, unlike most mammals, retain nuclii in their
>adult blood cells.
Mammalian red cells start out with nuclei and then they expel them.
--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com
In search of cognoscenti
Eloise Beltz-Decker
> In article <GyDzH...@world.std.com>,
> Paul Ciszek <pci...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
> >
> >Archaea look like bacteria, but are different on a fundamental chemical level.
> > Some live in undersea volcanic vents, some in nuclear reactors, and
> > some like to eat minerals like iron pyrite. They use the left-handed
> > forms of some molecules that everything else on earth uses the right-
> > handed version of. Because they have been found living *inside of
> > rock*, some people think they may permeate the Earth's crust and
> > therefore constitute the majority of the living matter on this planet.
> > And they weren't discovered until about 1980.
> >
> >Bacteria, you already know about.
> >
> >Eukaryota contains every cell with a nucleus. Animals, Plants, Fungi,
> > Rhodophyta (stuff like kelp that functions like a plant, but doesn't
> > have chlorplasts), slime molds, the various algaes, are all kingdoms
> > under Eukaryota
> >
> Displaying more ignorance: How do bacteria and archaea manage without
> nuclii?
Their genetic material just floats about happily in the
cytoplasm, dangling free in the breeze, as it were.
--
Eloise Beltz-Decker + elo...@ripco.com + http://www.ripco.com/~eloise
"Math was my friend until ninth grade. That's when it started slapping
me around and screaming that I was its bitch. It used to make me cry."
-- Andrea Principe