251
By notanidiot / Wednesday 20 June 2012 12:46 / United States - Lansing
Add a comment
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Create my account Sign in
Top comments
By  FireFlie07  |  20

He seriously thought birds were reptiles???Lmao

Comments
By  ryanLinke  |  4

your boss is so smart.

Reply
  syley  |  5

It's might not be that dumb of a question actually. Maybe the boss heard that scientists have found evidence linking chickens to tyrannosaurs and thought maybe they would be considered reptiles (which they have) and wanted to know what his employee thought. But seeing as I wasn't there I can't vouch for the boss he may very well just be dumb, just taking a guess here.

Reply

It's like saying a tree is an orange. The two thinfs are in no way close. And you'd have to be an idiot to believe it.

Reply
  killdozer1  |  2

Zoologically speaking, chickens are mammals. But, in terms of evolution, the most recent common ancestor of birds and mammals would be a reptilian species. This is evident with several body systems in birds, including gizzards. So yes, chickens are technically reptilian.

Reply
  RacerX1695  |  1

I actually just finished a biology paper on the subject, yes, aves are the closest relative to reptilian species, and if you look closely at the chicken, it can be noted that they actually are scaled creatures, just have an extra feathery layer on top. A common ancestor for such a clade would be the archaeopteryx… look it up if you don't know what it is…

Reply
  YourBuddyElmo  |  5

Still, as things stand chickens are not considered to be reptiles as we know them today. At the very least, the boss should have expounded and not over-reacted at what can easily be construed as a comical question.

Reply
  MCweSCRAPPY  |  2

It's based on genetics, not necessarily physical appearance. The DNA strands could share similarities while not looking alike. Also, they found that velociraptors had feathers so they did look alike.

By  FireFlie07  |  20

He seriously thought birds were reptiles???Lmao

Reply

It's really not that big of a mistake. It's one that anybody who didn't do a lot of science in high school could make.

Reply
  hansbo  |  6

A quick glance at Wikipedia shows us that birds are indeed sometimes classified as reptiles, though not officially. In fact, crocodiles are more closely related to birds than they are to lizards, despite both crocodiles and lizards being reptiles. If one is aware that birds evolved directly from dinosaurs, it's not that much of a stretch to be curious as to whether they are actually classified as reptiles. So, the boss was wrong, but not laughably so.

Reply
  Roflsauruz  |  12

^ No, you pretty much would have had to skip elementary and high school altogether, rarely leave the house, and never talk to anybody about things like that. It's COMMON SENSE. I don't see how ANYONE, besides uneducated children, would even CONSIDER a bird to be a reptile. (And no, we're not talking about flying dinosaurs here - I'm pretty sure there were actual birds in dinosaur times... But not sure. Seems like there could have been.... Anyone who knows for sure, feel free to enlighten me, lest I search google for my answer.) OP, somebody who's THAT stupid should NOT be your boss. FYL.

Reply
  missalkali  |  8

you're using wiki as a factual source? you're laughably stupid, along with the boss

Reply
  Roflsauruz  |  12

34- thanks for the info, although I wouldn't be so hasty as to use Wikipedia as your form of validation. Some more research will have to be done on this subject from a variety of sources before I can believe that a bird is, in fact, of the reptilian family.

Reply
  Abdul888  |  16

yeah, according to wikipedia, birds are reptiles and humans are a form of birds especially when drunk! (you know we fly)

Reply
  hansbo  |  6

Relax a bit, I'm using Wikipedia as a source for an anonymous comment field on the Internet, not a doctoral dissertation. Most studies on the subject points to Wikipedia being as correct, or even more correct, than other encyclopedias when it comes to the natural sciences.

Reply
  a1f0sff  |  23

Theory of evolution people, theory of evolution! What 34 said is correct, there are species in one group (reptiles, mammals, etc.) that are more related to species from another group than of their own group. These so-called groups include the animals that have similar behavior and similar characteristics but that doesn't mean that their ancestor was the same. Different animals from the same ancestor develop different ways of living, as well as species from different ancestors develop similar characteristics, thus being classified from the same group. These animals change because they adapt to different conditions that nature provides them. Now, I'm not sure about the evolution of birds and yes, they might have evolved from reptiles but I'm almost positive that no bird belongs to reptiles. Being a descendant of something doesn't mean that you belong to it.

Reply
  Soloman212  |  28

101; we're not saying birds are dinosaurs, we're saying that they're kinda reptiles like the dinosaurs were, just like you're kinda human like your Grandpa Jack was/is.

Reply
  mikemillzy92  |  6

Hmm well according to my biology professor feathers are just evolved scales and if you look on a chickens leg you will see what appears to be scales...so that's a valid question.

Reply
  Raesin  |  21

By the looks of it #37 you skip anything that might even be remotely educational. There were no birds (as you imagine them) in dinosaur times, there were dinosaurs that had feathers and could fly = reptiles. So in fact birds might be considered close to reptiles, as they've even retained their bone structure, the only difference is their warm blood.

Reply
  truth_spitta  |  0

Gonna get down voted, but aren't we going off of the assumption everybody believes in the theory of evolution? Not saying you're not entitled to your belief system but you're throwing creationism out of the window.

Reply
  l23VIVE  |  17

Creationism can be thrown out the window, evolution is a plausible theory and it makes much more sense than "oh humans have always been humans" there i clear evidence that we evolved from apes. Creationism a stupid idea for stupid people

Reply

Birds actually are decedents of dinosaurs. You don't need wiki to tell you that. It's all over the internet and you learn it in first year biology in university if not earlier. Here is your daily biology lesson (yes I know its summer but it won't hurt you). "Reptiles" are a paraphyletic group, which means it includes some but not all descendants and as such birds typically do not fit into it. However, it is because of this odd nomenclature that people get confused, like OP's boss.

Reply
  LadyMadness  |  11

61- would it be creepy if I said I know you? Cuz you look awfully like sam's girlfriend You know just saying Also to contribute to this: the classification of Aves has been eliminated and birds are now classified as reptiles. A little fact that a few people might like to know :)

Reply
  fishwzrd  |  1

to dispel the current myth, reptiles are no more, they have been reclassified to sauropsids. Birds have also been reclassified as sauropsids due to many similarities that are undisputable. that being said, they are still far enough from said group that they aren't typically discussed with "reptiles" and in fact when scientists refer to birds they use aves and when talking about former "reptiles" use the term non-avian sauropsids. It's a relatively new classification (within 6 years) due to the advances and discoveries of cellular biology.

Reply
  l23VIVE  |  17

YouAreMyPrey, I AM a religious troll! And i know we evolved from a common ancestor but that was the first thing that came to min when i was writing that, i apologize for my incorrect use of terms. But either way Creationism is a load of bull crap

Reply

So basically every one who believes that we all came for Adam and Eve are all sinners because incest is wrong but yet every one came from two original people that's F-ed up if you ask me. Just think about it next time you kiss you spouse/partner your really kissing a family member.

Reply
  LadyMadness  |  11

197- I don't think 192 was calling people sinners for believing in creationism, I think he/she was just rudely stating his beliefs. Plus the theory of evolution is that many individuals of a population develop the same traits at around the same time period that help them survive and reproduce in their environment. Not one person messing up and creating a whole species. But you support of creationism is completely valid 197 And to everyone else, please respect other people's beliefs :)

Reply
  Shrike  |  22

truth_spitta- I can't believe people like you still use that argument, I mean, really? The word "theory" has a completely different meaning in the scientific world. In the scientific world, it's basically synonymous with "proven fact". Maybe before trying to run with the big boys, you should learn a little something about the matter you're arguing? I'll help you out: "The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)...One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed." You're fucking welcome.

Reply

Hey, guess what! Birds are reptiles! Seems like the majority of you needed to pay attention in your biology class!!! So, before you slam someone for asking an honest question, in this case one where the answer was "Yes," please educate yourself.

Reply
  Bias_P11  |  4

There were no flying dinosaurs. Pterosaurs were no Dinosauria, and the only thing that could be considered a flying dinosaur is a bird (although conventions divide them based on physical grounds rather than genetic grounds).

Reply
  ashanna1229  |  2

Wikipedia is not the best source and this is why. Thy are officially classified as reptiles now due to the mass amount of similarities especially in their bone structure.

Reply
  l23VIVE  |  17

Well 204, for one i see no connection between adam&eve incest and creationism being bullshit. But anyway i feel no need to respect other people's beliefs if their beliefs are based on something stupid.

Reply
  happyapy  |  16

Determining if one's beliefs are "stupid" is so very subjective. There will always be issues in which there is no definitive answer and you will choose a side. That is your belief and I'm willing to bet that you'd appreciate others not calling you an uneducated ignorant ass hat when they disagree with you. Please extend a similar courtesy.

By  Tracy_Evans  |  2

Daaaayyummm. Ouch. FYL.

Reply
  22cute  |  17

Right, that was hundreds of million years ago. Interesting factoid - but it in no way changes the argument. Humans descended from small rodent like creatures less than 5million years ago. Does that make you a rat? I think not. (well....not that fact alone, anyway)

By  BunnySlippers  |  6

I wonder how your boss became a boss..

Reply
  Awsumuzzie  |  12

66, what if he doesn't? O__o o__O. God, I hate dumb questions. It would've been stated in the FML had the job actually been related to the question the boss asked.

Reply
  Awesomeelliot  |  11

You sir, are retarted. Birds are just birds. They are a seperate class.

Reply
  olpally  |  32

Haven't you heard? Heard what?? That the bird is the word... Have the guys check that out.. Sir, the bird is greater than or equal to the word! Check it again!!! -family guy reference-

By  elguito  |  20

well if your boss is nice and not an asshole you probably wont get fired. just don't make another stupid mistake.

Reply
  cptmorgan6  |  8

I don't think knowing if birds are or aren't reptiles is common sense. Common knowledge, maybe. But common sense, no. Now, looking before crossing the street is common sense.

Loading data…