Something wrong with you
Comment on something's got to give
Szewek@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Bro, animals among the most numerous creatures? Bacteria, Archaea, and viruses are surely more numerous. I bet the same applies to fungi and plants. Oh, and protists, since they are unicellular and have twice the total biomass of animals.
In terms of biomass, animals are barely significant. And they are relatively big. So they surely are less numerous than other groups.
FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Gerudo@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Technically, they did say AMONG the most numerous.
Szewek@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I mean, yes, inaccuracy is another issue here. But I assume “the most numerous” means better than average, or at lest not the worst in its category (unless you actually standardize for the time since divergence, then there are probably some niche microbial taxa, some rare extremophiles, that are actually less numerous; still, surely worse than average).
jaybone@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
Who invited this guy?
samus12345@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I don’t think anything that not an animal can be accurately called a creature.
photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Then you would be wrong.
samus12345@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Yeah, you’re right. Some definitions are more limited, but others cover anything that can move of its own accord. I don’t think fungi or plants qualify, though.
2deck@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Count em
bathing_in_bismuth@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Catch em