Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 01:51:21
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard
Catskills in NYS
|
Just an argument on another thread that is getting ridiculously off topic.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/582313.page
|
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote:Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote:Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens BaronIveagh wrote:Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 01:58:42
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Apart from the belief that, of course they are animals because only Humans have a right to be sentient...
... of course they're animals. Humans are animals, too, because they aren't vegetables or minerals or beings of pure energy.
Necrons are an exception, and I'm not quite decided on how one would classify them.
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 02:10:19
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar
|
Humans, tau, and eldar are all animals. Necrons are robots with programming that imitates a Necrontyr's personality.
|
Thought for the day: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
30k Ultramarines: 2000 pts
Bolt Action Germans: ~1200 pts
AOS Stormcast: Just starting.
The Empire : ~60-70 models.
1500 pts
: My Salamanders painting blog 16 Infantry and 2 Vehicles done so far! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 02:35:15
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Tough Traitorous Guardsman
|
I think people are really missing Frozen Ocean's main point, you're talking cross-purposes. FO is talking about the definition of Animalia a specific biological term, everyone else talking about 'animal' as it is commonly used simply to mean a living thing that moves around and eats.
All creatures within Animalia have a united heritage, evolving on Earth in its climate, atmosphere, gravity levels etc.
Now 40k lore aside, in reality alien life would not simply slot into the artificial human definitions of nature. Say you have a high gravity, carbon dioxide atmosphere and intense humidity. You have a native of the planet, a rare flyer who relies on a helium 'bladder', the majority of its body, to keep it suspended above the harsh gravity. It has eight eyes situated all around the lower part of it body, uses tentacles to grab prey off the ground and gets hydrated by absorbing water vapour through its bladder.
Where does that creature fit into Animalia? Don't simply say its an animal so its part of Animalia. Animalia is merely an umbrella for the specific categories found to exist due to Earth's specific environment. Which specific category does it fit into?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/07 02:36:35
Oh What a Lovely War. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 09:13:56
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
It's also worth noting that some members of the Animal Kingdom appear very plant like. For example Coral and Sponge are both genetically 'animals'. Then there are plants, such as the Venus flytrap, that exhibit very rapid movement. We normally associate rapid movement with animals. But not being an animal does not by-definition preclude an organism from having animal like characteristics.
An organism that evolved separately on another planet would be genetically very different to both plants and animals. To the extent that they may not even have DNA at all (though it's likely they would have something functionally similar). But because of a process known as convergent-evolution they may still have some very familiar traits, such as eyes and limbs.
In the 40k universe it is not clear how genetically related the races are, given that the old ones had a hand in creating them all. Eldar appear very human-like, so they might share the same genetic heritage as humans. Orks seem to be fungus.
Tau might have evolved independently, or they might have evolved from Earth organisms that colonized their planet thousands of years prior. In the later case they might then be genetically animals.
Nids appear to have evolved in another galaxy, and their genetic make up seems to be way in advance of ours. Nids are almost certainly not animals.
In real life, it is actually also unclear how genetically unrelated we might be from an alien organism. It's possible that life was carried to earth initially by spores, or that spores from earth have reached other planets. If we ever did meet an alien organism, we might be shocked to discover that we share a common ancestor.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/07 09:28:00
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 09:20:18
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Jealous that Horus is Warmaster
|
My dad, a recently retired museum curator, preferred to define an animal as "That which did not or does not create art". To him the mark of sentience was in the preservation of history in some form. It could be spoken word, written text, sculpture, or some other manner of "record". Entities that created such things whether to document the world around them or for more mystic and spiritual reasons could be considered to be "People". Those that did not were animals.
Now that certainly does introduce some gray areas, particularly with higher primates, but in the case of most xenos races within 40k it would most certainly put them out of the realm of the purely animalistic. In fact by his definition I'd say the only questionable races would be Necrons, in their present form at least, and Tyranids... the latter simply because they are so unknown and alien compared to other more conventional life forms.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 10:24:52
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Tunneling Trygon
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland
|
I really, really don't want to discuss this any more. No offense or anything, Co'tor, but we've been going in circles for ages and I'm pretty sure I've said everything on the topic I have to say.
I am interested to see how Dakka handles it, though.
Final comment for now: this isn't about personal definitions like Dust's dad's. This is about actual definitions. Furthermore, yes, humans are animals.
Psienesis wrote:Apart from the belief that, of course they are animals because only Humans have a right to be sentient...
What? I don't believe that in the slightest, so I'm really confused as to why you'd think that. I mentioned human sapience to highlight the absurdity of the "this thing is defined the same as this other thing just because of some immediately obvious trait". The original argument was "Tau have hooves so therefore must be mammals". I was arguing against that, and mentioned human sapience as a trait so far unique to mammals and, excluding dolphins, primates - but nobody was arguing that Tau are primates.
Short version: I mentioned human sapience to highlight how silly the other argument was, not because I somehow believe that humans are "special".
EDIT: Here's a handy diagram!
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/03/07 21:52:27
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 11:47:09
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Cog in the Machine
|
Animals are one of the five kingdoms of life on Earth, the others are Bacteria, Protists, Plants and Fungi. All the Kingdoms a descended from a common ancestor, which, as far as we know, came into existence on Earth. In order to be a member of one of these kingdoms you must descended from that ancestor, and hence must have originated on Earth. So Ogryns, Ratlings and Squat are primates, mammals, vertebrates and animals because they share the the traits of those groups AND are descended from members of those groups on Earth, even though their present form evolved on other worlds Ork are not Fungi, Eldar are not primates, Tau are not ungulates and Tyranids are not insects (or reptiles) because, no matter how many traits they have in common, they are not descended from life on Earth. To hammer the point home; If, on a distant planet we encounter a species which is, though a miracle of convergent evolution, identical to humans, down to its DNA, but has never had contact with Earth and is not descended from, or in any way related to any life on Earth, it is still not a Primate, Mammal, vertebrate or animal, because it is not descended from any of these groups. It is a xenomorph All Eldar, Orks, Tau, Tyranids and other races which do not originate on Earth are xenomorphs. Terms like mammal, vertebrate, and fungi are used by convention because we lack word to describe things which share traits with those groups but are not members of those groups. TLDR if it doesn't come from Earth its not an animal
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/07 11:47:57
Now That I've Said it, It Must Be Canon
Why yes, I am an Engineer. How could you tell? |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 12:41:10
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
The Internet- where men are men, women are men, and kids are undercover cops
|
Dust wrote:My dad, a recently retired museum curator, preferred to define an animal as "That which did not or does not create art"
Elephants do that.
|
Jon Garrett wrote:Perhaps not technically a Marine Chapter anymore, but the Flame Falcons would be pretty creepy to fight.
"Boss, we waz out lookin' for grub when some of them Spice Marines showed up and shot all the lads."
"Right. Well, did you at least use the burnas?"
"We tried, but the gits was already on fire."
"...Kunnin'." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 12:56:18
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Stalwart Veteran Guard Sergeant
Czech Republic
|
Everyone is animal, just Sly Marbo is MAN.
|
Being optimistic´s worthless if it means ignoring the suffering of this world. Worse than worthless. It´s bloody evil.
- Fiddler |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 13:01:47
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Trazyn's Museum Curator
|
Psienesis wrote:Apart from the belief that, of course they are animals because only Humans have a right to be sentient...
... of course they're animals. Humans are animals, too, because they aren't vegetables or minerals or beings of pure energy.
Necrons are an exception, and I'm not quite decided on how one would classify them.
Transhumanist Animals, probably.
They were animals, then Ghost in the Shell / Cybermen happened. Now they are robots.
|
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 13:36:59
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
What? I don't believe that in the slightest, so I'm really confused as to why you'd think that.
I'm simply parroting the Xenophobia of the Imperium.
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 17:02:22
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Leader of the Sept
|
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Psienesis wrote:Apart from the belief that, of course they are animals because only Humans have a right to be sentient...
... of course they're animals. Humans are animals, too, because they aren't vegetables or minerals or beings of pure energy.
Necrons are an exception, and I'm not quite decided on how one would classify them.
Transhumanist Animals, probably.
They were animals, then Ghost in the Shell / Cybermen happened. Now they are robots.
Based on the above, they were neither Humans nor Animals
Post-mortal Creatures, possibly
|
Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!
Terranwing - w3;d1;l1
51st Dunedinw2;d0;l0
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 17:05:46
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard
Catskills in NYS
|
I could be wrong, but does it have to have a common ancestor to be in the same kingdom. After all if life on primordial earth began in two different places (two different one-celled organisms) and those lineages never merge (however unlikely that is), if the end result for both of them were birds they would still be animals correct?
Actually wait, I forgot something. I don't know why but I thought kingdom as the highest rank. Tau might just be in a different domain but still classified as "animals" just "animals" for that domain.
|
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote:Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote:Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens BaronIveagh wrote:Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 20:45:12
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Tunneling Trygon
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland
|
Co'tor Shas wrote:I could be wrong, but does it have to have a common ancestor to be in the same kingdom.
Yes.
Co'tor Shas wrote:After all if life on primordial earth began in two different places (two different one-celled organisms) and those lineages never merge (however unlikely that is), if the end result for both of them were birds they would still be animals correct?
No. If a species of shark evolved into something that very heavily resembled a trout, would it be a trout (the answer is no)? Furthermore, it would be impossible for their lineages to "merge" - most things can scarcely crossbreed with even their own genus, never mind something that is literally a wholly unrelated form of life. It'd be worse than expecting plants and fish to crossbreed. Remember that we are infinitely more closely related to bacteria than we are to aliens, no matter how human-like they may appear.
Co'tor Shas wrote:
Actually wait, I forgot something. I don't know why but I thought kingdom as the highest rank. Tau might just be in a different domain but still classified as "animals" just "animals" for that domain.

No. The word "animal" literally means "of the kingdom Animalia", just as plants are "of the kingdom Plantae". Tau would be of their own classification, in a completely separate tree of life that goes higher than a domain. The domains are Prokaryotes (without a nucleus) and Eukaryotes (with a nucleus). To be in a separate domain, the Tau would have to be a life form divergent from Earth's Common Ancestor Cell, and therefore within Earth's "tree of life". The diagram you posted - change the top level to read "Life of Earth". Now imagine another diagram quite like it, wholly disconnected, beginning with "Life of T'au", assuming that the life forms of T'au are even able to be classified in the same way as Earth's (as aliens, their analogue to genetics might be too, well, alien to classify by the same means).
Here's Hillis' Tree of Life. The Tau and any other aliens would belong on a separate tree altogether.
Actual genetic relation (phylogeny) is the cornerstone of how species are defined. If it was arbitrary and based on "this looks like X, smells like X, tastes like X", none of it - genetics, evolution, taxonomy - would have any meaning.
EDIT: It's entirely possible that mankind was created by the Old Ones (in 40k, of course). This doesn't mean that our evolutionary history is invalid - just that the Old Ones are advanced and intelligent enough to make something as random and seemingly unpredictable as organic evolution predictable and under their control. In short, the whole ecosystem of Earth and how it changed through the ages was by their design, to create an end product (us) that met their desire. I like to think that, if the Old Ones really did create humans (which they should have, explaining our similarity to Eldar and Orks nicely), it was not a project of great importance. Perhaps even a mere work of art by their standards, a planetary ecosystem and sapient species the Old Ones' equivalent of a badly drawn OC on deviantART. The Eldar and Orks, however, were bred for war. Whether or not this means they were simply created from scratch or the end products of an ecosystem we'll never know, but I think it'd be the former, at least for the Orks.
EDIT2: Being created by the Old Ones doesn't make these different races related any more than my miniatures are related because I assembled them.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/03/07 21:26:59
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 22:32:48
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard
Catskills in NYS
|
Frozen, I was changing my opinion and agreeing with you silly  . I put animal in quotation marks for a reason because it would be the equivalent of our animalia. They might even use animalia just using the different life or domain (although I doubt it). The merge thing was for early stages of life, after all mitochondria (the things we have in our cells) started out as a different animals. I will say that I was typing quickly and didn't have much time to think about what I was saying.
|
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote:Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote:Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens BaronIveagh wrote:Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 22:40:47
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Jealous that Horus is Warmaster
|
EmpNortonII wrote: Dust wrote:My dad, a recently retired museum curator, preferred to define an animal as "That which did not or does not create art"
Elephants do that.
Well maybe that's why more and more groups and societies are feeling inclined to consider elephants worthy of the title of "persons" rather than simple beasts.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 23:11:27
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Frozen Ocean wrote:EDIT2: Being created by the Old Ones doesn't make these different races related any more than my miniatures are related because I assembled them.
It doesn't prove they are related, but it doesn't disprove it either. If moulds are to miniatures as genetics are to organisms, then it is perfectly possible for two miniatures to be cast from the same mould, and therefore related (genetically). Even if you then engineer them to be distinct. Clones could be considered 'assembled' organisms, and they are highly related.
Taking a step back outside the story, it seems to be a common problem for science-fiction writers. That they either are unable or unwilling to write aliens that aren't absurdly and implausibly human-like. I find there is often a lot of 'suspension of disbelief' involved when meeting new sci-fi races. Trying to explain these similarities in lore is very challenging. I think you are correct that Humans, Eldar and Orks being similar 'by design' is the only plausible explanation. However since we don't know the process that the old ones used to create, we can't say for certain whether Orks are 'like Fungi' or if they literally are Fungi, sharing a genetic ancestry with Earth Fungi. The same case could be made for Eldar and Animalia.
With regards to the Tau: Life could conceivably have been introduced to the Tau home-world during the dark age of technology, by long forgotten explorers. Perhaps via terraforming or just contamination. Again, they are unrealistically human-like... Or at least vertebrate-tetrapod-like. It wouldn't be unreasonable for Tau life to have originated on Earth and be related. I haven't come across anything in the background to rule out that possibility.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/07 23:15:32
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 23:14:27
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Tunneling Trygon
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland
|
Co'tor Shas wrote:Frozen, I was changing my opinion and agreeing with you silly  . I put animal in quotation marks for a reason because it would be the equivalent of our animalia. They might even use animalia just using the different life or domain (although I doubt it). The merge thing was for early stages of life, after all mitochondria (the things we have in our cells) started out as a different animals. I will say that I was typing quickly and didn't have much time to think about what I was saying.
Mitochondria (no matter if they count as life or not) happen to live inside the cells of eukaryotes. Living in something isn't merging lineage; we have plenty of non-pathogenic micro-organisms that live in us without becoming some kind of cross-domain hybrid species. Also, CACs on the same evolutionary path couldn't 'merge' in that way; mitochondria are a very, very special case. Symbiosis and parasitism, and all that. Meanwhile, the mental image of a bird with a bird-like life form living inside it is quite peculiar.
They wouldn't use Animalia, for reasons I've stated (because that would require them to be related), but pretty much. The first aliens we encounter will probably be named after the person(s) that discovers them, or after their planet or something. If an alien planet had an ecosystem in a massively similar pattern to our own then yes, it would be organised with "equivalents" - but they would have their own names. They could be of the biota "Hoobertia" (after Dr Hoobert, their discoverer, of course), and their bird-equivalent could be called "Hoobirds" or "Hoobertaves". Knowing scientists, the first aliens will probably be named after sci-fi pop culture.
I imagine the Imperium cares little for such, as TiamatRoar put it, "semantic nonsense". I imagine their definition of "animal" would be "any creature useful to the Imperium" (including xenos farmed in agriculture), while "foul, foul xenos" would be reserved for anything they don't like, such as Tau, Eldar, or the vicious dragon-bulls of Gargotox IX. Or perhaps this very discussion we are having now is a point of heated debate between members of the Magos Biologis?
Dust wrote: EmpNortonII wrote: Dust wrote:My dad, a recently retired museum curator, preferred to define an animal as "That which did not or does not create art"
Elephants do that.
Well maybe that's why more and more groups and societies are feeling inclined to consider elephants worthy of the title of "persons" rather than simple beasts.
"Beasts" and "people" are completely unscientific and not the topic of discussion (although I have honestly never heard of any group or society inclined to call elephants "people"). Humans are animals, regardless of how much we laud ourselves for our perceived superiority.
EDIT: Smacks wrote: Frozen Ocean wrote:EDIT2: Being created by the Old Ones doesn't make these different races related any more than my miniatures are related because I assembled them.
It doesn't prove they are related, but it doesn't disprove it either. If molds are to miniatures as genetics are to organisms, then it is perfectly possible for two miniatures to be cast from the same mold, and therefore related (genetically). Even if you then engineer them to be distinct. Clones could be considered 'assembled' organisms, and they are highly related.
Taking a step back outside the story, it seems to be a common problem for science-fiction writers. That they either are unable or unwilling to write aliens that aren't absurdly and implausibly human-like. I find there is often a lot of 'suspension of disbelief' involved when meeting new sci-fi races. Trying to explain these similarities in lore is very challenging. I think you are correct that Humans, Eldar and Orks being similar 'by design' is the only plausible explanation. However since we don't know the process that the old ones used to create, we can't say for certain whether Orks are 'like Fungi' or if they literally are Fungi, sharing a genetic ancestry with Earth Fungi. The same case could be made for Eldar and Animalia.
With regards to the Tau: Life could conceivably have been introduced to the Tau home-world during the dark age of technology, by long forgotten explorers. Perhaps via terraforming or just contamination. Again, they are unrealistically human-like... Or at least vertebrate-tetrapod-like. It wouldn't be unreasonable for Tau life to have originated on Earth and be related. I haven't come across anything in the background to rule out that possibility.
Pinning the source of the similarity between races on a "Precursor"-style race is a common enough trope, yeah, and really the only workable explanation. However, if the whole process of Earth's ecosystem was indeed to produce humans, an actual genetic relation is highly unlikely! Besides, if the Old Ones were so advanced and intelligent as to plot a definable course through the chaos of organic evolution, there's no reason why they would even need to use a genetic "mould". Indeed, to extend the model analogy, a sculptor produces new models from scratch, not from parts of existing models (unless they're Forge World). Especially if humans really were an insignificant project by some Old One in its free time, while the Orks and Eldar were created to combat the Necrons, presumably an action by whatever the Old Ones had for a military or government. The Tau could have been created by the Necrons, the Old Ones, or even the Eldar (their unique Warplessness and their similarity to the other big races is definitely telling of something, even if we don't know what). I think it's better to assume that the relationships between the big races are in design only, not in actual genetics.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/07 23:26:53
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 23:19:12
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Elephants do not create art, this has been largely debunked. They are following a pre-set range of motions that they are trained to do.
http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/elephantpainting.asp
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/07 23:47:26
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Powerful Spawning Champion
|
Dust wrote:My dad, a recently retired museum curator, preferred to define an animal as "That which did not or does not create art". To him the mark of sentience was in the preservation of history in some form. It could be spoken word, written text, sculpture, or some other manner of "record". Entities that created such things whether to document the world around them or for more mystic and spiritual reasons could be considered to be "People". Those that did not were animals.
Now that certainly does introduce some gray areas, particularly with higher primates, but in the case of most xenos races within 40k it would most certainly put them out of the realm of the purely animalistic. In fact by his definition I'd say the only questionable races would be Necrons, in their present form at least, and Tyranids... the latter simply because they are so unknown and alien compared to other more conventional life forms.
So basically he created a definition that inherently favors humans.
Humans are animals.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/08 00:11:02
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Frozen Ocean wrote:I think it's better to assume that the relationships between the big races are in design only, not in actual genetics.
I agree completely, that would be my personal preference too.
Of course, that does still raise some interesting questions. Sculptors do tend to have a style or 'handwriting' from which a discerning eye might be able to identify their work. I imagine that no matter how advanced the old-ones were, they would still reuse ideas, and probably conform to certain design paradigms, which might be recognizable. The similarities between the 3 races in terms of their body plan is very recognisable. But those similarities might not just be skin deep, you might see them expressed all the way down to a genetic level. Even if the genomes are clearly unrelated (such as one being RNA and the other DNA).
I'm not sure if our classical tree of life is really set up to cope with genetic relatedness which is non-herditary. By that I mean organisms that evolved independently being demonstrably related at a genetic level (as opposed to just ecologically similar). It would be interesting to see how scientist would cope with that. I imagine our current biological classifications would have to be redefined.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/08 00:14:52
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/08 01:41:29
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Tunneling Trygon
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland
|
Smacks wrote: Frozen Ocean wrote:I think it's better to assume that the relationships between the big races are in design only, not in actual genetics.
I agree completely, that would be my personal preference too.
Of course, that does still raise some interesting questions. Sculptors do tend to have a style or 'handwriting' from which a discerning eye might be able to identify their work.
I was thinking that. Either it's stylistic choice or a definite favouring on their part. The humanoid body plan is pretty good for just being general, with obvious regard to technology. Not that I'm saying that being humanoid is the best shape a warrior-race could be, but it works.
Smacks wrote: I imagine that no matter how advanced the old-ones were, they would still reuse ideas, and probably conform to certain design paradigms, which might be recognizable. The similarities between the 3 races in terms of their body plan is very recognisable. But those similarities might not just be skin deep, you might see them expressed all the way down to a genetic level. Even if the genomes are clearly unrelated (such as one being RNA and the other DNA).
That's not what RNA means.  RNA is basically half of a given piece of DNA. DNA works on a bunch of nucleobases that all correspond directly to one other. One half of DNA will have one nucleobase and the other half will have the corresponding one (X is always paired with Y, etc). RNA is just half (one string of the double helix) of one. It's important in replication and stuff.
Smacks wrote:I'm not sure if our classical tree of life is really set up to cope with genetic relatedness which is non-herditary. By that I mean organisms that evolved independently being demonstrably related at a genetic level (as opposed to just ecologically similar). It would be interesting to see how scientist would cope with that. I imagine our current biological classifications would have to be redefined.
Well, organisms that involved independently but are genetically similar wouldn't be "related" at a genetic level, just the same (relation and similarity are different, but there are no cases of this in the real world at the moment because we've never encountered it). I think the only change to our definitions that would need to be made would be a quantity of "similarity", but this would only (well, astronomically low probability) come up in cases of intelligent design, which has a whole lot of implications in of itself. If two relatively unrelated (family-wise) human zygotes were genetically modified to be exactly the same, they would be clones - but they would not be related to each other. Weird stuff.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/08 03:02:14
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Frozen Ocean wrote:
That's not what RNA means.  RNA is basically half of a given piece of DNA. DNA works on a bunch of nucleobases that all correspond directly to one other. One half of DNA will have one nucleobase and the other half will have the corresponding one (X is always paired with Y, etc). RNA is just half (one string of the double helix) of one. It's important in replication and stuff.
Admittedly something like TNA or other XNAs would have been a better example. But I'm sure you know that RNA doesn't need to be combined into DNA to store and express genetic information, it can do so on its own (although it's obviously not as sophisticated). I just picked it as an example because there are already simple organisms which are based on a single-strand RNA genome. It seems to be the prevailing theory that all genetic information was carried in this way, long before the more stable DNA molecule came about. But I concede that it would probably be a poor choice for building complex organisms. What were the old ones thinking?
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/08 03:08:25
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/08 19:47:17
Subject: Re:Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Tunneling Trygon
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland
|
Smacks wrote:
Admittedly something like TNA or other XNAs would have been a better example. But I'm sure you know that RNA doesn't need to be combined into DNA to store and express genetic information, it can do so on its own (although it's obviously not as sophisticated). I just picked it as an example because there are already simple organisms which are based on a single-strand RNA genome. It seems to be the prevailing theory that all genetic information was carried in this way, long before the more stable DNA molecule came about. But I concede that it would probably be a poor choice for building complex organisms. What were the old ones thinking?
Ah, I thought you just thought that RNA referred to a different flavour of DNA with the "such as one being RNA and the other DNA" bit.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/03/10 02:48:48
Subject: Are tau (or any alien race for that matter) animals?
|
 |
Terrifying Rhinox Rider
|
Well, I am extremely pleased at the way this worked out. I am very impressed, all of you.
|
|
 |
 |
|