780
It's just loss. (mander.xyz)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
123 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 1 year ago* (11 children)

Well thats not what the infographic says. It specifies "mammals", not "mammals by weight".

OK so how many tons of cow are accounted for by whales?

Or does the survey cherry pick land animals too?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

    Why would the infographic be by number?
    (I'm not dissing you, I only ask bcs I never even thought about it being my population, like, what would it compare by population in such a vast group as mammals.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    Okay, so you have 240 rats and one cow in a pen on a farm. How many mammals are in the pen?

    This survey would answer that the pen is 90% cow and 10% rat by weight, therefore there are 9 times as many cows as there are rats.

    In reality land, where the rest of us live, we would say that there are 241 mammals in the pen and only 1 of them is a cow.

    You see why I'm calling bullshit by the way this is worded?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

    Oh, I see now, thx.

    For me (how I perceived the simplified pic) the main difference was that I didn't think 'in a pen on a farm' but 'on a planet'.
    And your example also screams of 'it's not comparable, don't do that, in what scenario would you need a number 241 that would made sense?'
    (I really can't think of on answer short of making a Twitch channel for each individual animal.)

    Also that question is leading bcs you ask how many, whereas the pic in the post doesn't specifically say anything (which is the complaint as I gather - but we deduct the meaning of words from context all the time in all languages, if the 'by individual' doesn't make sense, it's obviously not that).

    you have 240 rats and one cow in a pen on a farm

    Do you not think the farmer saying he has 241 animals would be made fun of?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    I'm basically saying that you can see from the context (the numbers) that it's biomass - the same-ish as below even when/if the first thing you think about doesn't make sense, you search for the way it does (again, not dissing, but strictly technically it is about literacy, which in this case the pic is at fault for not all of the audience not getting it, and you for not understanding it, an overlap just didn't happen):

    And yes, since this is pun-ish territory, it's normal to feel some anger, puns are there worst.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I was trying to think of some other meaning than 'drinks dispensary' for 'bar' and I couldn't think of a sensible reason for putting a bar in your shower for quite a while until I realised metal bar.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Yes, that describes the complexities of language perfectly (and the process of how you decipher the meaning)!

    We tend to forget how complex communication is, expressing huge concepts with a few sounds/characters/gestures is one of the greatest achievements of Earth's animals (humans included).

    It's amazing it even works. But requires a lot of brainpower to encode & decode.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The pic says "of all the mammals on earth". It's exactly as i said with the pen, just scaled up to a 3d spherical planetary sized pen. The numbers I'm talking about don't change.

    There are WAY more rats than cows. Period. They're on every continent except Antarctica, and there might be some weird subterranean prehistoric voles huddled around a hydrothermal vent pool or some shit.

    OP just needs to add a qualifier to the graphic. Anything along the lines of "with respect to biomass" right at the start

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    There are WAY more rats than cows. Period.

    So if you know that, why would you insist it's saying that instead of immediately looking for something that does fit?

    Also a planet is not a pen and no farmer ever will say they have 241 animals!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    A planet is a pen without fences. You just have to expand your perspective. You've obviously never interacted with a farmer in your life if you've never heard them brag about how many animals they have on the property. And those are just the ones they can count. Im sure some crazy farmer somewhere in India would be mad proud of how many rats he's got running around. They're holy in certain parts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •