Editing 636: Brontosaurus
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Explanation== | ==Explanation== | ||
β | [[Megan]] describes her relationship to [[Cueball]] with the simile "our love is like a turtle," a comparison often made when referring to a shy and slowly developing yet steady sort of romance. However, Cueball thinks that the ''{{w|Brontosaurus}}'' is a better comparison. His explanation refers to the fact that remains of | + | [[Megan]] describes her relationship to [[Cueball]] with the simile "our love is like a turtle," a comparison often made when referring to a shy and slowly developing yet steady sort of romance. However, Cueball thinks that the ''{{w|Brontosaurus}}'' is a better comparison. His explanation refers to the fact that remains of ''{{w|Apatosaurus}}'' were by mistake believed to be a different genus, which the paleontologist {{w|Othniel Charles Marsh|O.C. Marsh}} named ''Brontosaurus''. It was later discovered that the two genera should be classified as one, with the older name prevailing according to convention [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatosaurus#Classification_and_species]. The term ''Brontosaurus'' therefore became a scientific redundancy. |
Applied to the scenario in the comic, Cueball apparently considers the relationship without any emotional foundation and only continues it out of nostalgic motives. This conclusion counteracts the initial romantic tone adopted by the turtle simile, as comparing a romance with a falsely classified fossil is one of the least charming statements imaginable.{{Citation needed}} | Applied to the scenario in the comic, Cueball apparently considers the relationship without any emotional foundation and only continues it out of nostalgic motives. This conclusion counteracts the initial romantic tone adopted by the turtle simile, as comparing a romance with a falsely classified fossil is one of the least charming statements imaginable.{{Citation needed}} | ||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
===Updates=== | ===Updates=== | ||
β | However the status of "Brontosaurus" remains under discussion, with a [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-brontosaurus-is-back1/ 2015 study of diplodocids] reporting that the more gracile fossils should be classified in a separate genus | + | However the status of "Brontosaurus" remains under discussion, with a [http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-brontosaurus-is-back1/ 2015 study of diplodocids] reporting that the more gracile fossils should be classified in a separate genus, which would then be ''Brontosaurus''. |
==Transcript== | ==Transcript== |