File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
So Colbert will have a spider named after him.
Aptostichus stephencolberti

How does this make /an/on feel?

As a biofag I hate it. I think scientific names should be Genus descriptor. I hate all this shit named after HURR DURR RANDUM shit that has nothing to do with the animal.
Like all these fucking fish named after Herbert Axelrod, I mean yes he has done a bunch for the hobby and described lots of fish but do 20 fucking fish need to be Genus axelrodi?
And fucking African cichlids, fuck.
The first fucking white mother fucker to step into a rift lake names all these fuckers after himself, his fucking german fucking friends, and the damn niggers that showed him where the fish swim for fucks sake, thanks a lot people.

Good example: Nannocharax rubrolabiatus, ok the one with the red lips, good, thank you fuck to name that fish.
Bad example: Paracheirodon axelrodi, Axelrods tetra, which the fuck one is that? Fucker.

Also, splendens and exquisitus suck too, the pretty one? Oh really? Thanks.
>> Anonymous
The ones called Zebra fish are the ones that have stripes like a zebra
>> Anonymous
That's what you get by having liberal scientists.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>287261
Yes anon, zebroides is a fucking GREAT scientific name.
>> Anonymous
I agree completely, but from an entirely different perspective. I'm a languagefag who is fluent in latin, so whenever I see scientific names my latin/greek pronunciation kicks in and I'm also looking for derivations which help describe the species. Rubrolablatus is a great one, because despite the fact I'm not familiar with the species, I still potentially have an idea of what organism it describes. Names like Myrmekiaphila neilyoungi drive me nuts because it creates an English speaking bias which also throws off the standard phonology employed in these names. So not only is it completely undescriptive, which defeats the purpose entirely, but it even creates confusion in how to say it for those not from the culture in which the chosen name originates.
>> Anonymous
>>287263
As in "free-wheeling, bountiful" or as in left-leaning, cause I fail to see how the latter comes into play.
If anybody would be a splitter just so they could tack their name onto something for eternity it would be a Republican.
>> Anonymous
Wow, if they're going to name it after someone (which by itself is stupid) it should be after a person whose DONE SOMETHING with their life. The only comedian I might not rage at would be George Carlin.
>> Anonymous
>>287266
Yeah, maybe a Republican did it. There are many republicans among his fans.
>> Anonymous
>>287267

Hello. I support people because they're dead.

That is all.
>> Anonymous
>>287267
carlin would be carlini, which is italian (kinda like latin eh?) for pug, or small short haired dog. So that seems fittting, the next ugliest, bug-eyed, flat faced, stupidiest member of a genus that is found can be named carlini, and I'll be ok with that.
>> Anonymous
>>287260
RRRAAAAAGGGEEEE
>> Anonymous
i agree, the main breed of bearded dragon that people keep as pets has the scientific name of "Pogona vitticeps" but when someone called "Henry Lawson" found a dwarf breed of bearded dragon, what did he call it? "Pogona henrylawsoni" -.-
>> Dr. Grissom !9GXd8p7Kds
I agree, the speceis name should be latin for a feature that pronounces that species as to how it differs from the rest of the Genus. However, certain species are cryptic, or are rather bland, and naming the species after someone very helpful in the field of the Genus should be appropriate. Not Colbert though, but I can understand why he did it, he wants attention so his biology department gets more money so he can work.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Just give them numeric IDs. Anglofags trying to pronounce Latin hurt my ears.
>> Anonymous
>>287366
Henry Lawson is a dead Australian poet.
>> Anonymous
>>287656

This, kind of. As a paleo-fag, I can kind of attest to the fact that it gets hard to give several genera a name that describes a physical feature distinct to them because, say, for hypsilophodonts, there're only so many ways to say "small little fucker with long legs and a beak." Hence Othnielosaurus (after Othniel Charles Marsh), Qantassaurus (after the local airline), and Atlascopcosaurus (after the company on whose property it was found).

And even when you do manage to name an animal after its physical features, oftentimes said names get a bit vague, as gets to be the case with sauropods, rendering that practice kind of inane. Of all the amazing features the animals have that they could be named for, half of them are given names vaguely referencing a small, rather unimpressive feature of their vertebrae (Apatosaurus, Diplodocus, the now-defunct Pleurocoelus). Okay, so we now have an animal named "Deceptive Reptile" for its physical features, but how is anyone going to figure out just what the fuck on the animal that's referencing without a lengthy explanation beforehand?

Point is, I don't mind naming an animal after, say, someone or someplace significant to that field of science (this Colbert shit's just silly, but say, naming Lambeosaurus after *paleontologist* Lawrence Lambe or naming Edmontosaurus after the Edmonton Formation *in which it was found* is fine by me), so long as it provides a distinctive name that allows one to readily identify the animal from others of the same family.
>> Anonymous
>>287691

And for the record, I fucking cringed when they dubbed a recent species of pachycephalosaur Dracorex hogwartsia.
>> Anonymous
I don't mind. Makes taxonomy slightly more entertaining, as it's fairly mundane work most of the time, looking at generic names.

Ursus pedoursi
>> Anonymous
But... ursus pedoursi... Bear pedobear!

Which I actually mistranslated as Bear bear with shepherd's crook initially because I was thinking in Latin not in 4chan.
>> Anonymous
You can call dinosaurs whatever you want, we don't know shit about most of them except for a bone frag and where we found it so naming them after any damn thing seems fine to me.