Quote:
Originally Posted by nickolasanastasiou
One needs to use the correct terminology if one aims to be accurate. Calling subspecies species is not accurate unless perhaps referring to the nominate subspecies.
You asked for the species name. There is only one current species name for this species. Ken provided it. Then you stated 11 species when there are not 11 species (there are several subspecies). The article says 11 types. Not 11 species. Not 11 subspecies. The article's use of types is acceptable. You stated 11 species, so I would not be so bold as to lump myself or others into the "you and I" you mentioned. It now comes across like you are trying to rationalize not knowing the difference.
Circling back, Ken provided a reasonable response given what is known and what is not for these particular animals. These are excellent animals and any buyer should feel fortunate to have the opportunity to work with them. I would also hope that any buyer would know what species he/she is getting when buying a Galapagos tortoise since there is only one species.
|
Technical newbie I get the terminology part but you are contradicting yourself
. I should not have lumped you and I together without knowing more of your competence as I was giving you the benefit of doubt on hey this kid knows more than everything that looks like a turtle is a turtle. But then you made it clear you're that kid in class who hasn't understood words like kind, type and species are used loosely and interchangeably to refer to a certain subspecies and defining words like EXACT when asking an informal question. I know a few herpetologist that know far more than I do that when speaking informally aren't technically correct but I understand what they are referring too. You don't need to huff, throw your hands on your hips and get technical with me. For most people C. Nigra is the extent of what they want to know so I understand Ken's answer as I don't expect many people either to understand technical terminology when referring to a subspecies and many times it's just wasting words that go right over the person's head. If someone who is FOB or knowledgeable about reptiles were to inquire in more depth if I am talking about anoles for example, I'm more than happy to get technical with them. By your technicality if someone were to ask me what species of anoles I have from the Caribbean when I refer to anolis marmoratus I should say I only have one species from Guadeloupe? Even though I may have a couple of the subspecies? Or do I comprehend what they are asking me is how many types of anoles I have from the Caribbean?
Ya still with me?
Now let's say I advertise some for sale and someone inquires about wanting anolis marmoratus, well since technically anolis marmoratus inornatus is the same species as the 5 other subspecies, you think the buyer would be happy if that's what he got when he or she opens the box?
NO! Just like what if only 1 or a few of the C. Nigra subspecies were to have the saddle shaped shell and that's what I wanted but that not what he had or vice versa, I wanted the traditional tortoise shaped shell and he only has the high saddle shape subspecies ay?
How do I know if what Ken has weren't a nominate species and I ask what subspecies do you have would also be incorrect wouldn't it? Or what if he were offering a species that had no subspecies and asking, what kind of subspecies do you have wouldn't be correct either. I could see and understand his reply being, Ah subspecies? Google it.
I never said or implied his response was not reasonable nor did I question the quality of his stock. If I thought he didn't have quality stock I wouldn't be inquiring especially being they are worth a pretty penny, well worth it IMO and when I'm not living in Minnesnowta, I'll definitely be getting a pair.
Linear Mode
