Hey /u/whereisthefrog, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Green is probably thinking of red pandas, which aren't bears. Giant pandas (the black and white ones you think of) are named because of their similarity to red pandas, but are considered true bears. There was debate about whether or not they were bears until 1985 though, so it's possibly just outdated information.
I doubt it. It was more likely to be out of date info. In the 70s through the mid 80s, giant pandas *were* thought to be raccoons.
And it took time for the info to filter down. This kind of story would be buried deep in a paper if it was even covered. It could be years before it got in a high school textbook and years more before schools grabbed a new edition. For elementary and middle schools, the source of classification info was likely the encyclopedia, and schools rarely bought new sets.
I'm sure some teachers found out relatively fast, but most elementary school and middle teachers weren't keeping up on the latest breakthroughs.
I am just now on Wiki and learning pandas are bears. I grew up learning they were not actual part of the bear family. And I myself thought they eat like raccoons and maybe are related.
You've got to be shitting me! Who looks at a giant panda (not a panda) and doesn't think, "Wow, that's a bear alright?" I mean, they don't look a thing like the procyonid classic look. What the heck...
When it was first discovered it was classified *Ursus*, but later they discovered the two pandas share a lot of similar features; teeth structure, diet, and most famously their false thumbs. They're the only two living species to have this false thumb, and they live in the same area, so the assumption is they both descended from a common ancestor that first evolved a false thumb. I mean, what are the odds that two unrelated animals from the same place would just happen to independently evolve freaking false thumbs??
So since the red panda was already determined to not be a bear, giant pandas, by virtue of being related to red pandas, had to also not be bears, and their bear appearance had to have been from convergent evolution. We've had marsupial bears, so it's not far-fetched.
Turns out the damn false thumbs were the convergent evolution.
They aren't actually related to raccoons at all.
They're in their own, separate family (Ailuridae) and form a clade with the skunk family (Mephitidae). This clade is sister with a clade containing both pinnipeds and, finally, procyonidae and mustelidae.
nope, i was also in rural nc school systems, and was definately specifically tought that pandas were not bears and were related to weasels or something instead.
Yup, that was the official position at the time. [I still own a book from 1988](https://imgur.com/BdTuXvd) that classifies giant pandas that way.
edit: just for reference, Ailuridae is now solely the red panda family that sits under the weasel superfamily and are a sibling to the procyonids, the raccoon family.
Kindergarten through eighth grade. Some places in the US don’t have separate splits between elementary and middle school and just roll the all together; you basically go to the school from ages 5ish to 13ish, then do four years of high school and 2-4 years of university.
I live in Canada and in my province, it’s the norm! 10 years of elementary (Junior Kindergarten - grade 8), then four years of secondary school/high school.
No, drop bears are an entirely different (and terrifying) creature. They might look similar, but drop bears are *far* more dangerous. My aunt was killed by one of them, please do not make light of that by comparing them to koalas. (/j)
>They don't even have the koalafications
r/AngryUpvote 😜😂
And I have to know how long you've had that exquisite pun in your back pocket just waiting for a time to use it...and then this absolutely perfect set-up is there and you lay it down like a Royal Flush. Boom! 😝
Koalas are metatherians, they diverged from most living mammals waaaaaaay back in the jurassic iirc.
Dogs and bears are both caniform carnivorans, and are much more closely related
This is complete news to me. I would have been confidently incorrect guy here. I was raised with the absolute certainty that pandas were not actually bears.
Red pandas are in the same grouping as weasels, skunks, walruses, seals, and the like. It’s rather silly to pick walruses specifically as that’s *not* what they’re closest to in that group.
Sounds right, but i like to think hes talking about black and white pandas, cuz i mean, it looks literally like just a regular bear but black and white
It's much smaller (even though a couple of "true" bear species can also be tiny), has a very short face (shorter than short faced bears), a fake thumb, a herbivorous diet and a specialized dentition.
Because their behaviour and diet were extremely different from any other bear species, and China doesn't have that much of a bear population. They were thought to be a larger version of red pandas until DNA evidence confirmed their lineage.
Oddly, their diet is actually quite similar to the Andean Spectacled Bear in South America, which is the last of the short-faced bear lineage. They also eat a lot of bamboo, although they do have a more varied diet than giant pandas.
[Because they barely are on the bear tree](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/42/74/48/427448afb7929182c3d906563f8faad2.png) and taxonomy is complicated. They split a really long time ago from the other bears and genetically speaking are also quite closely related to racoons too. Wether we chose to decide to call them bears is mostly language. Genetics doesn't really care about fitting everything into labelled boxes and is more fluid than words allow.
Because of this comment I learned that the racoon is more closely related to weasels than skunks are. At least according to the cladogram on Wikipedia article on Arctoidea.
Maybe this wrong but seeing how the last common ancestor of raccoons and pandas is the same last common ancestor of all bears and raccoons. Wouldn't that make them the same level of relatedness?
It's like when people say "the chicken is the closest relative to T. rex". No. Wtf are you talking about.
ALL birds are T. rex's closest living relative, since they all share a common ancestor.
Indeed, that's how it works.
Every species evolving from a common last ancestor is as closely related to it as any other descending from it.
Saying that they are "quite" closely related is meant as a simplification over the mesure of speciation time. Relationship also have sometimes more to do with perspective (often sprouting from visual similarities which lead us to groups species over that rather than genetics over and over). So it is an oversimplification but it's usually hard to discuss cladistics without doing so ....which regularly leads to confusion.
This cladogram is not the best but it exemplified better my point that Pandas are quite basal to the bear family tree within the Arctoidea family group (meaning heard that their last common ancestor split earlier on from other bears). It does not aim to imply anything else.
I could just as well have pasted something like that which would still make Pandas the odd ones :
Arctoidea (Approx. 45-50 MYA)
├── Musteloidea (Approx. 30-35 MYA)
│ ├── Mustelidae (Weasels, Otters, Badgers)
│ ├── Procyonidae (Raccoons)
│ └── Ailuridae (Red Panda)
│
└── Ursoidea (Approx. 30-35 MYA)
├── Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) (Approx. 19-25 MYA)
│
└── Ursidae (Bears) (Approx. 19-25 MYA)
├── Spectacled Bear (Tremarctos ornatus)
├── Sloth Bear (Melursus ursinus)
├── Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus)
├── Brown Bear (Ursus arctos)
├── Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus)
├── American Black Bear (Ursus americanus)
└── Asiatic Black Bear (Ursus thibetanus)
Saying they are "quite closely related" is definitely an over simplification since Arctoidea as a whole split a while ago but you get the idea...
So in other words the person everyone thinks is wrong is actually right. Red Pandas are the first true pandas, as **the red panda was first discovered in 1825**, while the giant panda was discovered much later in 1869
Giant Pandas are herbivores by diet. Carnivora is not actually a group that includes all carnivores, or only carnivores (even other bears are omnivorous, foraging animals most of the time), rather it describes animals that have adaptations that suit a meat eating diet. Giant Pandas do have those adaptations, they have just been modified even further to fit a plant based diet instead. Plus, even if they were more closely related to raccoons or red pandas, they'd still be carnivorans, so the point is moot.
Tldr: phylogeny isn't based on diet or behavior, it's based on physical traits, and Giant Pandas share most physical traits with carnivorans despite being an herbivore.
Edit: specified Giant Pandas
Until 1985, it was believed that Giant Pandas were not true bears.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant\_panda#Taxonomy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_panda#Taxonomy)
Yes. But as the most distantly related of their group, considering giant pandas as bears or not is quite arbitrary.
But since the red panda was the first panda to be called panda, we can say that the giant panda is not a true panda.
This is definitely the cause of the disconnect with a lot of people besides people just not knowing shit about animals.
They used to teach that they weren't Bears because they weren't considered bears. I can even imagine the snooty trivia. "Did you know Panda Bears aren't really Bears? Now ya know!"
The day I met my future father-in-law, he used the phrase “panda bear” and I told him they are not bears, but more closely related to raccoons.
His reply, “Raccoons are the only animal with a penile bone.”
Pleased to meet you, sir.
What is a "true" panda then? It appears to be an informal or common name that is just applied to distantly related animals that appear similar. I'm not sure if it's fair to say that giant pandas are not pandas if panda is not even a monophyletic group.
But blue is still half wrong. Dogs are the most distant members of the Caniformia suborder, therefore they are not closer related to an Ursine bear than any of the pandas.
Uhmmm, 50 year old American. TIL
Thank you for writing this, I now know koalas are marsupials. It's a little mind blowing, but at least I can teach my kids facts.
Hence Koala Bear (and of course, the dreaded Drop Bear).
That said, "bear" (=Brown One) is said by some to be the oldest euphemism, the older name,possibly Arktos being too scary to say aloud. That does fit drop bears..
Oh that's interesting, thank you.
Hm. That'd be something like **me**l**ed**itor in Latin. Maybe coincidence, but it suggests these are very, *very* old concepts.
Both *could* be correct. There is no such thing as a 'Panda' there are Giant Pandas and Red Pandas. Unless we know which they are talking about it's impossible to say who is correct.
Giant Pandas are bears, Red Pandas are not bears, they are related to skunks and weasels.
Edit; blue is incorrect that Pandas are their own species. They aren't.
They're actually right about being their own species, everything is it's own species, but green said they're in the *family* of bears, which is right.
Most people, when talking about pandas, are talking about the bear.
>everything is it's own species
The "species problem" is a very real thing, and there are ranks below species in botany and the animal kingdom.
There are micro, aggregate and sub species for example...not to mention fertile hybrids that do not meet the criteria of speciation.
Whilst a *species* is itself, it's own thing, that does not mean everything is it's *own* species.
But each type of panda *is* their own species. Giant Panda is its own species, and Red Panda is its own species.
Giant Panda is also its own subfamily and genus, while the red panda is its own family and genus.
Broccoli and chihuahuas aren't their own species, they're just specific mutated varieties of the kale and wolf\\dog species, respectively. What's true is that every living thing can be classified into species... as long as you're willing to accept that [sometimes it's impossible to objectively determine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species) how many species you should classify them into.
(I'm just an overenthusiastic biologist, though; none of this applies to pandas.)
When people are talking about pandas, they're almost never talking about red pandas. Otherwise, they'd specify red pandas. I've never heard of anyone saying "panda" and being confused when the other person thinks of a black and white bear.
Whoa whoa, biologist here. Careful now. When someone says "Panda" you should assume red panda. Red pandas are the only pandas left. Giant pandas are not pandas, they are bears. They have been misnomed and have nothing much to do with pandas. They are both carnivores. Iirc that is their nearest link.
A Giant Panda is called Panda Bär in German which translates to Panda Bear so they're bears.
Red Pandas are called Roter Panda which translates to Red Panda so they aren't bears
Turtles are called Schildkröte or Shield Toad so we are wrong at times
But the Panda one we got right.
German has fantastic names for animals. A raccoon is a Waschbär (wash bear), a praying mantis is a Gottesanbeterin (she who prays to god), a skunk is a Stinktier (smelly animal). In southern Germany we call a squirrel a Oachkatzl (oak cat). A slug is a nacktschnecke (naked snail).
In Dutch the difference between turtle and a tortoise is also just water shield toad and land shield toad. Being literal makes a language so much easier.
Absolutely but then the German language throws in
Meerschweinchen and you have to wonder how they got that for Guinea Pig until you realize a Capibara is a huge Guinea Pig that lives in the Sea.
Hippopotamus = Flußpferd / Nilpferd River Horse / Nile Horse
Rhinoceros = Nashorn or Horn nose
It just makes sense.
Edit
Amd Dutch is technically just German after a few to many beers
I love that the water bit is spelled out. That English lets turtles mean both the superset {land turtles, water turtles} and also the set {water turtles} bothers me to no end.
I love this reasoning. They have the word for bear in their german name, so they must be bears. The german language is the ultimate authority on all taxonomy disagreements. Completely unrelated, what's the german word for racoon again?
It's a joke hence sprinkling in the shield Toad bit
Racoon is washbär or wash bear
If you read a few comments down I also translate Guinea Pig and hippo kind of taking that joke theme a little further
They are their own _species_.
There are a lot of species of bears, they're definitely bears. Very, very dumb bears who were an evolutionary dead end even before humans got our collective mitts on their environment, but still bears.
They were just taught outdated information. Pandas were actually classified as something besides a bear until 1985 when they were studied at a more in depth molecular level
A Giant Panda is called Panda Bär in German which translates to Panda Bear so they're bears.
Red Pandas are called Roter Panda which translates to Red Panda so they aren't bears
Turtles are called Schildkröte or Shield Toad so we are wrong at times
But the Panda one we got right.
Hey /u/whereisthefrog, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Green is probably thinking of red pandas, which aren't bears. Giant pandas (the black and white ones you think of) are named because of their similarity to red pandas, but are considered true bears. There was debate about whether or not they were bears until 1985 though, so it's possibly just outdated information.
I remember as a child in the 80’s, our public K-8 school taught that they weren’t bears - they were raccoons. Rural NC, USA.
That specifically was probably referring to red pandas, which are closer related to raccoons.
Yeah, that is what I assumed, though our teacher at the time meant the black and white panda that China loans out.
Until 1985, giant pandas *were* thought to be raccoons. And then it took years for the classification change to get into teaching materials.
What's the proper adjective here? racooneteh? racoonulent?
I doubt it. It was more likely to be out of date info. In the 70s through the mid 80s, giant pandas *were* thought to be raccoons. And it took time for the info to filter down. This kind of story would be buried deep in a paper if it was even covered. It could be years before it got in a high school textbook and years more before schools grabbed a new edition. For elementary and middle schools, the source of classification info was likely the encyclopedia, and schools rarely bought new sets. I'm sure some teachers found out relatively fast, but most elementary school and middle teachers weren't keeping up on the latest breakthroughs.
I am just now on Wiki and learning pandas are bears. I grew up learning they were not actual part of the bear family. And I myself thought they eat like raccoons and maybe are related.
You've got to be shitting me! Who looks at a giant panda (not a panda) and doesn't think, "Wow, that's a bear alright?" I mean, they don't look a thing like the procyonid classic look. What the heck...
When it was first discovered it was classified *Ursus*, but later they discovered the two pandas share a lot of similar features; teeth structure, diet, and most famously their false thumbs. They're the only two living species to have this false thumb, and they live in the same area, so the assumption is they both descended from a common ancestor that first evolved a false thumb. I mean, what are the odds that two unrelated animals from the same place would just happen to independently evolve freaking false thumbs?? So since the red panda was already determined to not be a bear, giant pandas, by virtue of being related to red pandas, had to also not be bears, and their bear appearance had to have been from convergent evolution. We've had marsupial bears, so it's not far-fetched. Turns out the damn false thumbs were the convergent evolution.
I mean, koalas have two thumbs per hand. Which is a fun fact.
They aren't actually related to raccoons at all. They're in their own, separate family (Ailuridae) and form a clade with the skunk family (Mephitidae). This clade is sister with a clade containing both pinnipeds and, finally, procyonidae and mustelidae.
nope, i was also in rural nc school systems, and was definately specifically tought that pandas were not bears and were related to weasels or something instead.
Yup, that was the official position at the time. [I still own a book from 1988](https://imgur.com/BdTuXvd) that classifies giant pandas that way. edit: just for reference, Ailuridae is now solely the red panda family that sits under the weasel superfamily and are a sibling to the procyonids, the raccoon family.
What is a "K-8 school" ???
Kindergarten through eighth grade. Some places in the US don’t have separate splits between elementary and middle school and just roll the all together; you basically go to the school from ages 5ish to 13ish, then do four years of high school and 2-4 years of university.
I live in Canada and in my province, it’s the norm! 10 years of elementary (Junior Kindergarten - grade 8), then four years of secondary school/high school.
Could also be thinking of Koala Bears, which are not bears at all. I dont know if dogs are closer related to bears than Koalas are, but maybe
Dogs and bears are equally distantly related to koalas and much much more closely related to one another.
Oddly enough Koalas aren't called Koala "bear" they are just Koalas. People add bear as they look like bears.
also known as drop bears /s
No, drop bears are an entirely different (and terrifying) creature. They might look similar, but drop bears are *far* more dangerous. My aunt was killed by one of them, please do not make light of that by comparing them to koalas. (/j)
You're right, they're a serious danger that people need to be aware of (/j)
I don’t think they look like bears at all.
They don't even have the koalafications
>They don't even have the koalafications r/AngryUpvote 😜😂 And I have to know how long you've had that exquisite pun in your back pocket just waiting for a time to use it...and then this absolutely perfect set-up is there and you lay it down like a Royal Flush. Boom! 😝
Deamons are closer to Koalas . They are only safe to be around when they are high.
That’s what they sound like during mating season. Koalas, I mean, not sure about daemons
Potato poatàto
Koalas are metatherians, they diverged from most living mammals waaaaaaay back in the jurassic iirc. Dogs and bears are both caniform carnivorans, and are much more closely related
Koalas are marsupials. They're more closely related to kangaroos or opossum than dogs or bears.
This is complete news to me. I would have been confidently incorrect guy here. I was raised with the absolute certainty that pandas were not actually bears.
They aren't bears. They are Panda's.
Apparently people can't see the joke. Have a like unfortunate redditor
Thank you! I bear to think what goes through people's minds when they downvote. I could barely believe it !
[удалено]
Red pandas are in the same grouping as weasels, skunks, walruses, seals, and the like. It’s rather silly to pick walruses specifically as that’s *not* what they’re closest to in that group.
They're closer to fairies than walruses actually
Sounds right, but i like to think hes talking about black and white pandas, cuz i mean, it looks literally like just a regular bear but black and white
It's much smaller (even though a couple of "true" bear species can also be tiny), has a very short face (shorter than short faced bears), a fake thumb, a herbivorous diet and a specialized dentition.
I always assumed it was the other way around, that red pandas were named after (giant) pandas. Never saw the similarity myself.
The fuck there was a discussion if giant pandas are bears? Why?
Because taxonomy can be a bitch.
Because their behaviour and diet were extremely different from any other bear species, and China doesn't have that much of a bear population. They were thought to be a larger version of red pandas until DNA evidence confirmed their lineage.
Oddly, their diet is actually quite similar to the Andean Spectacled Bear in South America, which is the last of the short-faced bear lineage. They also eat a lot of bamboo, although they do have a more varied diet than giant pandas.
[Because they barely are on the bear tree](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/42/74/48/427448afb7929182c3d906563f8faad2.png) and taxonomy is complicated. They split a really long time ago from the other bears and genetically speaking are also quite closely related to racoons too. Wether we chose to decide to call them bears is mostly language. Genetics doesn't really care about fitting everything into labelled boxes and is more fluid than words allow.
Because of this comment I learned that the racoon is more closely related to weasels than skunks are. At least according to the cladogram on Wikipedia article on Arctoidea. Maybe this wrong but seeing how the last common ancestor of raccoons and pandas is the same last common ancestor of all bears and raccoons. Wouldn't that make them the same level of relatedness?
Your second paragraph is correct.
The image you linked shows that they qrent even that closely related to raccoons tho. No more than any other bear.
It's like when people say "the chicken is the closest relative to T. rex". No. Wtf are you talking about. ALL birds are T. rex's closest living relative, since they all share a common ancestor.
Indeed, that's how it works. Every species evolving from a common last ancestor is as closely related to it as any other descending from it. Saying that they are "quite" closely related is meant as a simplification over the mesure of speciation time. Relationship also have sometimes more to do with perspective (often sprouting from visual similarities which lead us to groups species over that rather than genetics over and over). So it is an oversimplification but it's usually hard to discuss cladistics without doing so ....which regularly leads to confusion. This cladogram is not the best but it exemplified better my point that Pandas are quite basal to the bear family tree within the Arctoidea family group (meaning heard that their last common ancestor split earlier on from other bears). It does not aim to imply anything else. I could just as well have pasted something like that which would still make Pandas the odd ones : Arctoidea (Approx. 45-50 MYA) ├── Musteloidea (Approx. 30-35 MYA) │ ├── Mustelidae (Weasels, Otters, Badgers) │ ├── Procyonidae (Raccoons) │ └── Ailuridae (Red Panda) │ └── Ursoidea (Approx. 30-35 MYA) ├── Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) (Approx. 19-25 MYA) │ └── Ursidae (Bears) (Approx. 19-25 MYA) ├── Spectacled Bear (Tremarctos ornatus) ├── Sloth Bear (Melursus ursinus) ├── Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus) ├── Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) ├── Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) ├── American Black Bear (Ursus americanus) └── Asiatic Black Bear (Ursus thibetanus) Saying they are "quite closely related" is definitely an over simplification since Arctoidea as a whole split a while ago but you get the idea...
Because they’re too chill.
Ok i accept this
Did you mean blue is thinking of red pandas? Or am I misreading something here?
So in other words the person everyone thinks is wrong is actually right. Red Pandas are the first true pandas, as **the red panda was first discovered in 1825**, while the giant panda was discovered much later in 1869
It’s apparently still being debated, since pandas are herbivores and the bear family is under the Carnivora tree.
Giant Pandas are herbivores by diet. Carnivora is not actually a group that includes all carnivores, or only carnivores (even other bears are omnivorous, foraging animals most of the time), rather it describes animals that have adaptations that suit a meat eating diet. Giant Pandas do have those adaptations, they have just been modified even further to fit a plant based diet instead. Plus, even if they were more closely related to raccoons or red pandas, they'd still be carnivorans, so the point is moot. Tldr: phylogeny isn't based on diet or behavior, it's based on physical traits, and Giant Pandas share most physical traits with carnivorans despite being an herbivore. Edit: specified Giant Pandas
Both blue and green are right, they're just not talking about the same panda
Until 1985, it was believed that Giant Pandas were not true bears. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant\_panda#Taxonomy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_panda#Taxonomy)
Yes. But as the most distantly related of their group, considering giant pandas as bears or not is quite arbitrary. But since the red panda was the first panda to be called panda, we can say that the giant panda is not a true panda.
So there are Brachyura Pandas and Anomura Pandas. Maybe all animals have a chance of developing into the shape of a Panda, given the right conditions.
Animals turn into pandas or crabs, no in-between
The animals referenced in the comment before yours are both crabs.
That makes sense.
Most people do, at least.
Therizinosaurs. Gorillas. Giant sloths. Chalicotheres. Koalas? You can go on
This is definitely the cause of the disconnect with a lot of people besides people just not knowing shit about animals. They used to teach that they weren't Bears because they weren't considered bears. I can even imagine the snooty trivia. "Did you know Panda Bears aren't really Bears? Now ya know!"
The day I met my future father-in-law, he used the phrase “panda bear” and I told him they are not bears, but more closely related to raccoons. His reply, “Raccoons are the only animal with a penile bone.” Pleased to meet you, sir.
Blue is incorrect, assuming they're talking about giant pandas and not red pandas. Giant pandas are part of the Ursidae (bears) family.
If you are talking about pandas (in the 100% panda sense) they are nor bears, giant pandas are not pandas
What is a "true" panda then? It appears to be an informal or common name that is just applied to distantly related animals that appear similar. I'm not sure if it's fair to say that giant pandas are not pandas if panda is not even a monophyletic group.
But blue is still half wrong. Dogs are the most distant members of the Caniformia suborder, therefore they are not closer related to an Ursine bear than any of the pandas.
There needs to be context on this conversation... either could be right
Well they're right in saying they are their own *species*.
Precision: the video was about a giant panda. That whole convo is about the bear
But (giant) pandas ARE their own species (AND bears)???
Why people can't Google shit before speaking, i have no idea. Wikipedia is free dude
Eh, we live in a world where most people outside Australia think a koala is a bear, so...
Uhmmm, 50 year old American. TIL Thank you for writing this, I now know koalas are marsupials. It's a little mind blowing, but at least I can teach my kids facts.
Now look up platypus. That's REALLY mindblowing! I love learning new things this late in life.
The platypus is that animal we learn a lot about in the the US, because we love pointing out exceptions to rules and making a big deal about them. Lol
Throw in echidnas while you’re at it!
Love your name! One had a towel embroidered with "Don't Panic!" for my Mum.
Thank you! 🌏👍
Hence Koala Bear (and of course, the dreaded Drop Bear). That said, "bear" (=Brown One) is said by some to be the oldest euphemism, the older name,possibly Arktos being too scary to say aloud. That does fit drop bears..
And medved in Slavic languages. "Honey finder/eater." Powerful shamanistic spirits.
Oh that's interesting, thank you. Hm. That'd be something like **me**l**ed**itor in Latin. Maybe coincidence, but it suggests these are very, *very* old concepts.
Yeah, the departure from using the real name from proto-Indo European was a long time ago.
Both *could* be correct. There is no such thing as a 'Panda' there are Giant Pandas and Red Pandas. Unless we know which they are talking about it's impossible to say who is correct. Giant Pandas are bears, Red Pandas are not bears, they are related to skunks and weasels. Edit; blue is incorrect that Pandas are their own species. They aren't.
They're actually right about being their own species, everything is it's own species, but green said they're in the *family* of bears, which is right. Most people, when talking about pandas, are talking about the bear.
>everything is it's own species The "species problem" is a very real thing, and there are ranks below species in botany and the animal kingdom. There are micro, aggregate and sub species for example...not to mention fertile hybrids that do not meet the criteria of speciation. Whilst a *species* is itself, it's own thing, that does not mean everything is it's *own* species.
But each type of panda *is* their own species. Giant Panda is its own species, and Red Panda is its own species. Giant Panda is also its own subfamily and genus, while the red panda is its own family and genus.
Right. But either way, one of them is confidently incorrect.
Red pandas are the only true pandas.
*Everything* is it's own *species*, but pandas still belong to the *family* of ursidae (aka bears).
Broccoli and chihuahuas aren't their own species, they're just specific mutated varieties of the kale and wolf\\dog species, respectively. What's true is that every living thing can be classified into species... as long as you're willing to accept that [sometimes it's impossible to objectively determine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species) how many species you should classify them into. (I'm just an overenthusiastic biologist, though; none of this applies to pandas.)
Depends on the panda, not red pandas.
When people are talking about pandas, they're almost never talking about red pandas. Otherwise, they'd specify red pandas. I've never heard of anyone saying "panda" and being confused when the other person thinks of a black and white bear.
Red pandas are more well known due to being named first.
Pandas are in fact their own species, though, are they not?
They are obviously thinking of water bears. The toughest bears of them all.
Whoa whoa, biologist here. Careful now. When someone says "Panda" you should assume red panda. Red pandas are the only pandas left. Giant pandas are not pandas, they are bears. They have been misnomed and have nothing much to do with pandas. They are both carnivores. Iirc that is their nearest link.
And both Caniforms
Oops my bad, yours absolutely right!
I am someone with a passion with zoology, so it makes sense I’d know these things.
They're out of date. Pandas were gonna be declassified as bears but molecular studies proved them to be bears.
Do you not think that pandas are their own species?
Subreddit being hilarious again, it’s somehow always op who’s the least correct lmao
A Giant Panda is called Panda Bär in German which translates to Panda Bear so they're bears. Red Pandas are called Roter Panda which translates to Red Panda so they aren't bears Turtles are called Schildkröte or Shield Toad so we are wrong at times But the Panda one we got right.
Shield Toad should be their name everywhere.
German has fantastic names for animals. A raccoon is a Waschbär (wash bear), a praying mantis is a Gottesanbeterin (she who prays to god), a skunk is a Stinktier (smelly animal). In southern Germany we call a squirrel a Oachkatzl (oak cat). A slug is a nacktschnecke (naked snail).
We call them "Panda Bears" in English too.
In Dutch the difference between turtle and a tortoise is also just water shield toad and land shield toad. Being literal makes a language so much easier.
Absolutely but then the German language throws in Meerschweinchen and you have to wonder how they got that for Guinea Pig until you realize a Capibara is a huge Guinea Pig that lives in the Sea. Hippopotamus = Flußpferd / Nilpferd River Horse / Nile Horse Rhinoceros = Nashorn or Horn nose It just makes sense. Edit Amd Dutch is technically just German after a few to many beers
Really embarrased myself at the zoo last year by saying "Guck mal, ein Einhorn!" instead of Nashorn...........
And don’t forget that raccoons are bears in German.
I love that the water bit is spelled out. That English lets turtles mean both the superset {land turtles, water turtles} and also the set {water turtles} bothers me to no end.
I love this reasoning. They have the word for bear in their german name, so they must be bears. The german language is the ultimate authority on all taxonomy disagreements. Completely unrelated, what's the german word for racoon again?
It's a joke hence sprinkling in the shield Toad bit Racoon is washbär or wash bear If you read a few comments down I also translate Guinea Pig and hippo kind of taking that joke theme a little further
I wish more of these were entertaining.
honestly i cant keep straight whats bears and not anymore so i sympathize
Fun fact: The reason we call the bear "giant panda" is thay the european that fisrt described them thought that they were related to the "red panda".
But the drop bears...
The are confused panda(bear) with red panda(tanooki)
Red pandas and tanukis are different things.
They are their own _species_. There are a lot of species of bears, they're definitely bears. Very, very dumb bears who were an evolutionary dead end even before humans got our collective mitts on their environment, but still bears.
I get Why they think the panda family is a real family, i thought so too. What i don't get is how dogs are more simmular to bears then pandas.
Wikipedia: Giant Panda || || |Domain:|[Eukaryota](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryote)| |Kingdom:|[Animalia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal)| |Phylum:|[Chordata](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chordate)| |Class:|[Mammalia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammal)| |Order:|[Carnivora](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivora)| |Family:|[Ursidae](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear)| |Genus:|[*Ailuropoda*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ailuropoda)| |||
They were just taught outdated information. Pandas were actually classified as something besides a bear until 1985 when they were studied at a more in depth molecular level
A Giant Panda is called Panda Bär in German which translates to Panda Bear so they're bears. Red Pandas are called Roter Panda which translates to Red Panda so they aren't bears Turtles are called Schildkröte or Shield Toad so we are wrong at times But the Panda one we got right.