███████ ████████

[pseudomonas]

█ █████ ██████████ ██████████ █████████████████████████████████ ████ ███████ ██ █████ ██████ █████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ ██ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ███████ ███████ █ █████ ██████████ ███████ ████████████████████████████████████████████ ████ ████ ██ ████ █ █████ ███████████████████ ███████████ ███████████ ████ ████ ██ █ ███

Comments

[gerald_duck]

I think they should have been a little more clear what they mean by "animal" and "plant".

Though, actually, I now realise everything with even the most meagre chance of being called a plant or animal has DNA, doesn't it? Hmm.

[pseudomonas]

What's ambiguous as to whether it's an (animal or plant) or not?

[gerald_duck]

Prokaryotes?

I know that in biological terms they're organisms/life, but neither animal nor plant, but in non-scientific language people still expect that all organisms are either animals or plants, I feel.

There's a danger of turning such questions into a test of whether people use words in the everyday or scientifically-precise sense, rather than whether or not they understand the science at all.

[pseudomonas]

The answer to the question remains the same whether you use "animal or plant" as a synonym for "independent biological organism" or not.

[gerald_duck]

Yes. I realised that between answering the quiz (including ticking the ambiguity box) and commenting to explain the ambiguity. I thought it more honest to note this in my comment than go back and fix my answers.

[ptc24]

Presumably "independant biological organism" != virus, by your definitions.

[lethargic_man]

If it's not an animal or a vegetable, it must be a mineral! *crunch* Hey, who turned my mushroom into stone?

And let's not mention RNA viruses and viroids, etc, which only an overly pedantic person like pseudomonas would qualify as non-independently living, but which definitely contain no DNA...

[pseudomonas]

I rule that viruses aren't alive. Any life they may appear to have is an illusion. The umpire's decision is final.

[lethargic_man]

Fortunately, I am an overly pedantic person too. :o)

[pseudomonas]

No such thing, I'm sure.

[cartesiandaemon]

Maybe they have *some* life. But obeying your restriction, I withdraw the middle half of my objections :)

[pseudomonas]

Even if they're alive (which is debated), they're not animals (which isn't).

[cartesiandaemon]

Speaking even semi-technically I agree, and the dictionary backs you up (member of kingdom animalia, etc). But I'm sure I've heard[1] it used colloquially to mean 'mobile life'.

I have the impression that someone saying "all animals and plants" means "all life" even though that's not what they said.

[1] For instance, in fiction. Alien animal-like life is called animal, even though it's genetically unrelated to the animal kingdom.

[pseudomonas]

Motile, not mobile, surely. And viruses aren't motile.

[cartesiandaemon]

Hmmm. I guess you're right. OK, viruses drift around (maybe irritating the nose in the meantime) until they catch a cell, then latch on? It's fairly gutsy for something which doesn't have any, well, anything, but I guess it's much less than some plants do, which no-one disagrees are plantlike.

[pseudomonas]

I suspect the irritation happens after the latching on.