Poads: A Griffinidae?

[Bowhead Whale]

Thank you, Basilisk. So, Poads (in their world, of course) are Monotrema. I should have known 💡 Platipus actually is built in the same way: an egg-laying mammal with a bird-like head!

[Melody]

Bowhead Whale wrote:

Thank you, Basilisk. So, Poads (in their world, of course) are Monotrema. I should have known 💡 Platipus actually is built in the same way: an egg-laying mammal with a bird-like head!

Similar but not the same exactly. Poads(tm) have feathers.

[Skigod377]

Yeah, and a butt crack instead of a tail.

[Maebnus]

[Adaneth]

Maebnus3 wrote:

😆 😆 😆

[Starbreeze]

Too cute!!! 😆

[lamortefille]

😆

[Bowhead Whale]

Yeah, OK, Poads’ relatives are entirely unknown. 😉
But still, there is something I still don’t understand. 🙁 Of course, it’s not a question of life or death 😀 ! You said that Fantasies are classified by the number of limbs, although you also said that this is tricky. OK, but by who? 😛 What I mean is… let me give you an example.

An Egyptian Sphynx has a feline body with a human head. A Greek Sphynx has a feline body, a human head… and wings. But both are Sphynxes. Right? So, why not consider that they are closely related to each other, instead of imagining that they “evolved” from different ancestors and became almost exactly the same through convergence? They do not exist anyway, so why not simplifying things? 🙂
So, if a Hyeracosphynx has a feline body and a bird of prey’s head, and a griffin is part bird of prey, part feline, with wings, cannot we think that the Griffin is a Greek (or persian?)winged cousin of the Hyeracosphynx, like the greek Sphynx is a winged cousin of the continental Egyptian Sphynx? This way, the “classification” would be a lot easier. It is even simpler when we see wingless manticores besides winged manticores and seing both as manticores! This way, the classification of the Griffin would be:

Philum: NEOVERTABRATES (Fantasius) 😉
Class: NEOHOTBLOODS (or whatever the name)
Order: SHYNCIFORMS (Sphynxes)
Family: GRIFFINIDAE
Genre: AVIFELIS (by Nightcrow 😉 )
Species: AVIFELIS GRIFFUS

What do you think?

[Purplecat]

Maebnus3 wrote:

*snort!!* That’s too funny! 😆 😆

[Bowhead Whale]

I know it’s funny, Purplecat. 😮 But aren’t we here to have fun? 😛

[Purplecat]

😆 😆

[Bowhead Whale]

Right, Purplecat.
But then, what do you think of what I said about the griffin’s classification?

[Maria]

The classification makes sense to me, except these last two suborders. By Basilisk?

Bowhead Whale wrote:

Genre: AVIFELIS (by Basilisk 😉 )
Species: AVIFELIS GRIFFUS

[Bowhead Whale]

Well, Greater Basilisk, aren’t you the one who employed the term “avifelis? 🙁

Maybe I just forgot about the first part of your screenname? 😥

Oh! No! I just saw it: I just mixed up two forum members: Nightcrow and Greater Basilisk! 😆

[dark_zorse]

Wait… we are arguing about… fantasy creature taxonomic classification?

Isn’t that… arbitrary at best? Presuming you are using the traditional dichotomous branching classification?

I mean, I can cobble together an exemption to any rules you might set as far as distinguishing characteristics… that’s sort of the idea of fantasy animals.

And just one more thought… traditional classification is being challenged and re-arranged on a daily basis for creatures that *do* exist, mainly on the premise or existence of DNA similarities (Or dissimilarities). This is why hyenas are more closely related to mongooses than dogs, and why vultures are more closely related to ciconiformes (Storks) than true falconiformes (hawks and eagles).

[Author]

Posts