Whilst Linnaean taxonomy has been built on and corrected to breaking point whilst leaving behind distracting words which used to include species which can’t be genetically grouped like “Reptile”, phylogenetic taxonomy is both easier and better suited to organising our findings.
We still use terms which confuse. I was caught out recently in a semantic loop whereby in trying to show that we are apes and thereby primates, I was bounced back and forth between Linnaean structuring.
This transcript of an Aron Ra video is what sparked the conversation;
““Primates” are collectively defined as any gill-less, organic RNA/DNA protein-based, metabolic, metazoic, nucleic, diploid, bilaterally-symmetrical, endothermic, digestive, tryploblast, opisthokont, deuterostome coelemate with a spinal chord and 12 cranial nerves connecting to a limbic system in an enlarged cerebral cortex with a reduced olfactory region inside a jawed-skull with specialized teeth including canines and premolars, forward-oriented fully-enclosed optical orbits, and a single temporal fenestra, -attached to a vertebrate hind-leg dominant tetrapoidal skeleton with a sacral pelvis, clavical, and wrist & ankle bones; and having lungs, tear ducts, body-wide hair follicles, lactal mammaries, opposable thumbs, and keratinized dermis with chitinous* nails on all five digits on all four extremities, in addition to an embryonic development in amniotic fluid, leading to a placental birth..”
Primate nails are keratinous
and these are the corrections submitted to me by Usual Oaf on twitter;
For my previous ruminations on this topic please see http://wp.me/p13sOy-30