rapture Posted December 1, 2013 #1 Share Posted December 1, 2013 The Mayan spoke of the "gods of the underworld" as reptilian in nature; and connected their return to Earth with changes in the heavens; perhaps planet X ( Nibiru) ; however, people( myself included) have tried to report contact with them with or without the return of this planet; nevertheless, with all the histories, myths, and legends of reptiles in contact with countless human civilizations, I am yet to find any that catorgorized the reptiles as animals. This is a new thing. The word animal usually conveys no real threat; reptiles hardly fit that profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted December 1, 2013 #2 Share Posted December 1, 2013 humans are dangerous, elephants are dangerous, so what you are sayin is reptiles are non Earth origin with no based facts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rashore Posted December 1, 2013 #3 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Of course lizard people are animals... They aren't vegetable or mineral 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted December 1, 2013 #4 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Animals noun The definition of animals are members of the kingdom Animalia and are generally characterized by having a multicellular body, quick movement, specialized sense organs and the ability to get and digest food. That includes reptiles last I looked. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike G Posted December 1, 2013 #5 Share Posted December 1, 2013 The Mayan spoke of the "gods of the underworld" as reptilian in nature; and connected their return to Earth with changes in the heavens; Since when do the Mayans know more about the world than people in the present day? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafterman Posted December 1, 2013 #6 Share Posted December 1, 2013 I'm not following you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seaturtlehorsesnake Posted December 1, 2013 #7 Share Posted December 1, 2013 perhaps the op meant to say mammal? still doesn't make any sense, though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Unicorn Posted December 1, 2013 #8 Share Posted December 1, 2013 (edited) The Mayan spoke of the "gods of the underworld" as reptilian in nature; and connected their return to Earth with changes in the heavens; perhaps planet X ( Nibiru) ; however, people( myself included) have tried to report contact with them with or without the return of this planet; nevertheless, with all the histories, myths, and legends of reptiles in contact with countless human civilizations, I am yet to find any that catorgorized the reptiles as animals. This is a new thing. The word animal usually conveys no real threat; reptiles hardly fit that profile. however, people( myself included) have tried to report contact with them You made contct with them???? Edited December 1, 2013 by White Unicorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplos Posted December 1, 2013 #9 Share Posted December 1, 2013 All reptiles are alien reptilians from Planet X now? Is that what you're getting at? You haven't found any ancient civilizations that called reptiles animals. Good thing the modern civilizations all agree then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundew Posted December 1, 2013 #10 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Since when do the Mayans know more about the world than people in the present day? Come on! Their end-of-the-world calendar was.... oh, wait, never mind..... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundew Posted December 1, 2013 #11 Share Posted December 1, 2013 As far as ancient cultures and their understanding of the natural/spiritual world, one can see where these cultures might have a different view of reptiles, the Mayans had to deal with venomous serpents like the Fer-de-lance, that lived in leaf litter and could surprise and then kill with a single bite. It is easy to understand they might consider the demons of the underworld reptilian. That in no way makes reptiles non-animals. Having kept turtles, snakes and also having bred lizards, I can tell you they are very much animals, and fascinating ones at that. Sometimes they get a bad rap, but the vast majority are harmless, even beneficial, and the truly dangerous ones should only be handled and kept by experts, because accidents can happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PersonFromPorlock Posted December 1, 2013 #12 Share Posted December 1, 2013 'British English' practice used to be that animals = mammals; birds and reptiles weren't 'animals'. I don't know if this is still true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beelzebufo Posted December 2, 2013 #13 Share Posted December 2, 2013 'British English' practice used to be that animals = mammals; birds and reptiles weren't 'animals'. I don't know if this is still true. If it is, then their system is seriously flawed. Mammals are vastly outnumbered by the non-mammal animals. They really do make up just a small portion of the animal kingdom. Also, yeah, the original post makes no sense whatsoever. Just what is it that makes reptiles so much more threatening to you? And what on earth do they have to do with planet x? If this is an animal, then reptiles sure as hell are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted December 2, 2013 #14 Share Posted December 2, 2013 'British English' practice used to be that animals = mammals; birds and reptiles weren't 'animals'. I don't know if this is still true. the Britannica does not seem to agree with that: animal (kingdom Animalia), any of a group of multicellular eukaryotic organisms (i.e., as distinct from bacteria, their deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA, is contained in a membrane-bound nucleus). They are thought to have evolved independently from the unicellular eukaryotes. Animals differ from members of the two other kingdoms of multicellular eukaryotes, the plants (Plantae) and the fungi (Mycota), in fundamental variations in morphology and physiology. This is largely because animals have developed muscles and hence mobility, a characteristic that has stimulated the further development of tissues and organ systems. Britannica 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLOMBIE Posted December 2, 2013 #15 Share Posted December 2, 2013 'British English' practice used to be that animals = mammals; birds and reptiles weren't 'animals'. I don't know if this is still true. Are you sure? Any source on that? Because it would be absurd. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundew Posted December 2, 2013 #16 Share Posted December 2, 2013 If it is, then their system is seriously flawed. Mammals are vastly outnumbered by the non-mammal animals. They really do make up just a small portion of the animal kingdom. Also, yeah, the original post makes no sense whatsoever. Just what is it that makes reptiles so much more threatening to you? And what on earth do they have to do with planet x? If this is an animal, then reptiles sure as hell are. Nice Tardigrade BTW. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nenaraz Posted December 3, 2013 #17 Share Posted December 3, 2013 Seriously, I never heard that the lizards are separate. 5th grade, elementary biology. - Humans - Animals - Plants Sub category - minerals And shrooms are aliens. Yay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinewave Posted December 4, 2013 #18 Share Posted December 4, 2013 The Mayan spoke of the "gods of the underworld" as reptilian in nature; and connected their return to Earth with changes in the heavens; perhaps planet X ( Nibiru) ; however, people( myself included) have tried to report contact with them with or without the return of this planet; nevertheless, with all the histories, myths, and legends of reptiles in contact with countless human civilizations, I am yet to find any that catorgorized the reptiles as animals. This is a new thing. The word animal usually conveys no real threat; reptiles hardly fit that profile. All human cultures have strange beliefs. That they exist does not mean they are depictions of reality. Planet X is a good example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PersonFromPorlock Posted December 4, 2013 #19 Share Posted December 4, 2013 (edited) Are you sure? Any source on that? Because it would be absurd. There are several examples on this page, especially definition three in the third block of definitions: "a mammal, as opposed to a fish, bird, etc." http://www.thefreedi...ary.com/animal Edited December 4, 2013 by PersonFromPorlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinewave Posted December 5, 2013 #20 Share Posted December 5, 2013 'British English' practice used to be that animals = mammals; birds and reptiles weren't 'animals'. I don't know if this is still true. I have never seen any evidence of that being true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseCuster Posted December 5, 2013 #21 Share Posted December 5, 2013 I have never seen any evidence of that being true. I'm not British, I'm Irish, but our spelling and grammar is pretty much British English in all but minor details, and I've seen people in the past, but not recently, insisting that insects, spiders, snails, crabs, etc. aren't animals. When questioned it was clear that they did indeed hold the weird idiosyncratic idea that animal = mammal and other 'animals' like arthropods, molluscs, etc. didn't qualify as animal.Not a viewpoint I've heard in a while but it doesn't surprise me that some other people this side of the Atlantic still hear or use the idea that animal = mammal and that bugs and slugs and other things aren't animals because of some odd old usage. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingitsune Posted December 5, 2013 #22 Share Posted December 5, 2013 Genetic data make the phylogeny quite clear now. There were a few surprises, like birds are more closely related to crocodiles than snake are to turtle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted December 5, 2013 #23 Share Posted December 5, 2013 All mammals are animals, but not all animals are mammals. Some animals are birds, fish, repitles, mollusks, insects, spiders. All living things are either plants or animals (flora or fauna). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted December 5, 2013 #24 Share Posted December 5, 2013 (edited) I'm not British, I'm Irish, but our spelling and grammar is pretty much British English in all but minor details, and I've seen people in the past, but not recently, insisting that insects, spiders, snails, crabs, etc. aren't animals. When questioned it was clear that they did indeed hold the weird idiosyncratic idea that animal = mammal and other 'animals' like arthropods, molluscs, etc. didn't qualify as animal. Not a viewpoint I've heard in a while but it doesn't surprise me that some other people this side of the Atlantic still hear or use the idea that animal = mammal and that bugs and slugs and other things aren't animals because of some odd old usage. I agree. I've heard this on my side of the Atlantic, too. I think maybe? they get confused by the category Vertebrates: Birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish. Those 5 categories are pounded into our brains in school. The invertebrates and their many categories not getting so much attention in school as well as being so vastly different from the Vertebrate Five. They find it hard to reason that "animal" is a vast category that includes both. Just a guess, though. Also, I've heard some say that humans are not animals. Edited December 5, 2013 by QuiteContrary 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nenaraz Posted December 5, 2013 #25 Share Posted December 5, 2013 (edited) I'm not British, I'm Irish, but our spelling and grammar is pretty much British English in all but minor details, and I've seen people in the past, but not recently, insisting that insects, spiders, snails, crabs, etc. aren't animals. When questioned it was clear that they did indeed hold the weird idiosyncratic idea that animal = mammal and other 'animals' like arthropods, molluscs, etc. didn't qualify as animal. Not a viewpoint I've heard in a while but it doesn't surprise me that some other people this side of the Atlantic still hear or use the idea that animal = mammal and that bugs and slugs and other things aren't animals because of some odd old usage. That "old usage" must be the dispense based on which species are invertebrates and which aren't. And this might be of more info http://animals.about.com/od/zoologybasics/a/vertinvert.htm In the schools humans are different from animals because of the compassion and the general awareness. But in flora/fauna-wise humans animals plants and shrooms are aliens Edited December 5, 2013 by Nenaraz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now