snopes.com Post new topic  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » Urban Legends » Disney » Just lion around (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Just lion around
Republican
I Saw Three Shipments


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Republican   E-mail Republican   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cervus:
Kitsune26, I don't know if you're aware of this, but bonobos are notorious for their frequent sexual encounters. The ones at the Jax Zoo also have very large genitalia (both sexes). Parents take their kids to see the "monkeys*" because "oh, they're so cute, aren't they just like us -- OH MY GOD WHAT ARE THEY DOING?! COVER YOUR EYES, JOHNNY!!"

[lol]

*Bonobos are apes, not monkeys, but the general public doesn't know the difference

I've heard that Bonobos are all bisexual and have sexual relations with both males and females alike.

--------------------
I'm a rumour weed.

Posts: 60 | From: Ohio | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Floater
Xboxing Day


Icon 215 posted      Profile for Floater   Author's Homepage   E-mail Floater   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cervus:

*Bonobos are apes, not monkeys, but the general public doesn't know the difference

Apes are a group of, mostly large, monkeys characterised by having no tails, but since the English language uses two unrelated words some English speakers fail to understand this.

--------------------
Små hönor skall inte lägga stora ägg för då blir de slarviga i ändan

Posts: 1334 | From: Sweden | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ganzfeld
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 304 posted      Profile for Ganzfeld     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Floater:
quote:
Originally posted by Cervus:

*Bonobos are apes, not monkeys, but the general public doesn't know the difference

Apes are a group of, mostly large, monkeys characterised by having no tails, but since the English language uses two unrelated words some English speakers fail to understand this.
Just because the two can be called by the word for "monkey" in your language (as they are in some, but not all, other languages) doesn't mean they "are monkeys". (To paraphrase a line from a comedy, "Excuse me! Is this English?") All monkeys and apes are primates but apes are definitely not monkeys. As long as we're using English, you can't just decide the word for primate is "monkey". Well, you can. But no one will care.
Posts: 4922 | From: Kyoto, Japan | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Floater
Xboxing Day


Icon 203 posted      Profile for Floater   Author's Homepage   E-mail Floater   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
quote:

Main Entry: ape
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English apa; akin to Old High German affo ape
1 a : MONKEY; especially : one of the larger tailless or short-tailed Old World forms b : any of two families (Pongidae and Hylobatidae) of large tailless semierect primates (as the chimpanzee, gorilla, orangutan, or gibbon) -- called also anthropoid, anthropoid ape



--------------------
Små hönor skall inte lägga stora ägg för då blir de slarviga i ändan

Posts: 1334 | From: Sweden | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ganzfeld
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ganzfeld     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Floater:
Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
quote:

Main Entry: ape
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English apa; akin to Old High German affo ape
1 a : MONKEY; especially : one of the larger tailless or short-tailed Old World forms b : any of two families (Pongidae and Hylobatidae) of large tailless semierect primates (as the chimpanzee, gorilla, orangutan, or gibbon) -- called also anthropoid, anthropoid ape


Yes, that definition b is wrong. Dictionaries have lots of wrong entries because they must include many different usages, even some that are wrong. For example, you may find a dictionary that includes whales under the entry for "fish", because that is a common misuse of the word. It does not mean that whales are fish.

ETA1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey

ETA2 Oops, I misread the entry, being the entry for ape, not monkey. Well, anyway, if you are talking about animal classification, and not common usage, apes are not monkeys.

Posts: 4922 | From: Kyoto, Japan | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Floater
Xboxing Day


Icon 215 posted      Profile for Floater   Author's Homepage   E-mail Floater   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
We're splitting rabbits here. Some people have no problems grouping tailless monkeys, AKA apes, and monkeys with tails together, others obviously have. It's just a matter of words anyway.

--------------------
Små hönor skall inte lägga stora ägg för då blir de slarviga i ändan

Posts: 1334 | From: Sweden | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ganzfeld
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ganzfeld     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
That depends if you are still certain that "some English speakers fail to understand" apes (and bonobos) are monkeys. The ones who fail to understand are the "general public" mentioned in Cervus' post and, perhaps, some others not familiar with the correct classification of animals in English.

But you're right that it is not important so, sorry about the hijack. [Smile]

(ETA: removed mistaken reference to ANOTHER animal page... geez, I need some sleep! G'night folks)

Posts: 4922 | From: Kyoto, Japan | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Electrotiger
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Electrotiger   E-mail Electrotiger   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
We're splitting rabbits here. Some people have no problems grouping tailless monkeys, AKA apes, and monkeys with tails together, others obviously have. It's just a matter of words anyway.
True, it's just words, but those words include the name of the animal, so it is important to recognize the disctinction between apes and monkeys.

Wikipedia, under the heading Historical terminology, says:
quote:
The original usage of "ape" in English may have referred to the baboon, an African monkey.
And indeed, you can see this in popular literature even as late as the late 1800s, a perfect example of which is Rudyard Kipling's Jungle Book, where he quite often refers to creatures in the Mowgli stories that are quite clearly not orangutans, but are constantly referred to as "apes." Kipling, argubly, knew his stuff technically speaking, and went to some lengths to be accurate in his descriptions (many of which were written from his own field observations).

Today, however, in a technical sense, there are vast differences between monkeys and true apes, and it's actually a very clear distiction in classification.

I find it funny that people are very precise when describing breeds of dog (which are all the same species, by the way) but they'll fudge when pointing out apes by calling them monkeys.

You wouldn't call a tiger a lion, or a lion a cheetah, so why would you call an ape a monkey? Because popular accepted culture says it's okay? Since everyone's doing it, it's okay to do it yourself?

(To be clear, when I say true apes, I'm including both families in the superfamily Hominoidea: Hominidae, which include gorillas, chimps, orangs, humans, and Hylobatidae, which include all the different species of gibbons. It's also important to note the differences in old world and new world monkey species.)

The obvious disctinction, right off the bat, is the tail issue. For the most part, monkeys have tails; Apes do not.

But this, when scrutinized, doesn't always hold true. There are monkeys that don't have tails, and there are primates that have tails that aren't monkeys.

The real distinctions come from evolutionary adaptations for vertical hanging and brachiation. As opposed to monkeys, apes generaly have wide shoulders, shoulder and arm joints with wide angles of movement, fingers of differing lengths, shorter, stronger, less mobile spines, etc. (Though gorillas stopped being common climbers a looooong time ago because of their weight, and humans, with our fancy-dancy upright stances, were able to see danger from a long way off.)

Even more technical, apes' and monkeys' dental formulas differ, but that's really not something you can see on casual morphological observation.

Nor can you see the similarities in genetic fingerprints that all apes share.

As I said above, and stand by it, they've got different names for a reason. You wouldn't call a poodle a shepherd, even though they're both dogs. You wouldn't call a Mac a PC, even though they're both computers. You wouldn't call a Mustang a Charger, even though they're both cars. These things all have simple distinctions, though they share common visual morphology.

So why would you cut the corner and call an ape a monkey? Because popular culture says it's okay? The two have simple, viewable distinctions, things that any kid could pick out.

I mean, aren't we a bunch of sticklers here? [Smile]

--------------------
Mr. Sagan did not go too fars, If you just took the time to scan its,
You'd count billions and billions of stars, And billions and billions of planets.

Posts: 332 | From: Kansas City, MO | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Andrew of Ware, England
A-Ware in a Manger


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Andrew of Ware, England   Author's Homepage   E-mail Andrew of Ware, England   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
All of this is a bit heavy for me! I am not in favour of zoos, but I did enjoy seeing this.

On a local BBC television programme a zoo keeper (or was he the owner?) was being interviewed outside a cage of monkeys (or were they apes?). As he was being interviewed a monkey picked up one of his droppings and, in perfect view of the camera, did a wonderful flick through the bars of the cage straight at the keeper and the turd struck him on his head.

Brilliant! A monkey with a sense of humour! The keeper, alas, did not see the funny side.

(This clip has appeared on a BBC out-take programme, but whether it has been seen outside the UK I don't know.)

--------------------
Andrew, Ware, England

Posts: 1709 | From: Ware, England | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Eccles9
I Saw Three Shipments


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Eccles9     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
So, with all this debate over classification; has anyone asked an ape or a monkey what they'd prefer to be called or if in fact they'd even care?

Hell, they probably think we're stupid for coming out of the trees and standing upright anyway.

I'd just love to think that we're the 'black sheep' of the primate world...

[Big Grin]

--------------------
'Do not follow in the footsteps of the wise, seek instead what they sought' Matsuo Basho

Posts: 97 | From: Adelaide, South Australia | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
die daagliks phosdex
Monster Mashed Potatos & Grave-y


Icon 98 posted      Profile for die daagliks phosdex   Author's Homepage   E-mail die daagliks phosdex   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arts Myth:
...Can't have our kids thinking, now can we? Pity he doesn't mention anything about how to prevent kids from seeing dead birds and other city animals on the streets, let alone avoid spotting the occasional two dogs, cats, squirrels, or birds engaging in "sexual immorality." Maybe CAP Alert should start rating zoos as to how "immoral" their animals are, so parents can decide which ones are least likely to create thinking in their adolescents.

Arts "walking on partner's back = sex!" Myth

Some years back, David L. Wolper produced a PG-rated documentary for theatrical release entitled Birds Do It, Bees Do It, which dealt with the old actus coitu among animals, complete with rather frank depictions thereof.

And with a PG (Parental Guidance Suggested) rating, besides!

Did anyone recall seeing that particular movie?

--------------------
"Nie lees die hoofopskrifte--lees die daagliks phosdex in plaas ..."

Posts: 1316 | From: Winona, MN | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Troodon
It Came Upon a Midnight Clearance


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Troodon     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
It's important to distinguish between apes and monkeys because humans are apes, and we are more closely related to the other apes than they are to monkeys. It makes more sense (in terms of evolutionary relationships) to call a gorilla or chimpanzee a human than it does to call it a monkey.

--------------------
Fools! You've over-estimated me!

Posts: 3745 | From: New York City | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
GenYus
Away in a Manager's Special


Icon 1 posted      Profile for GenYus   E-mail GenYus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Electrotiger:
As I said above, and stand by it, they've got different names for a reason. You wouldn't call a poodle a shepherd, even though they're both dogs. You wouldn't call a Mac a PC, even though they're both computers. You wouldn't call a Mustang a Charger, even though they're both cars. These things all have simple distinctions, though they share common visual morphology.

So why would you cut the corner and call an ape a monkey? Because popular culture says it's okay? The two have simple, viewable distinctions, things that any kid could pick out.

I mean, aren't we a bunch of sticklers here? [Smile]

Actually, if you really want to be a stickler, it is correct to call a Mac a PC since PC stands for Personal Computer. PC meaning IBM-compatible is simply because popular culture says it's okay.

--------------------
IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan

Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Troodon
It Came Upon a Midnight Clearance


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Troodon     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
As for animals in zoos, I was at Sea World in San Diego with my family, and there was a place where you could watch the manatees swim around underwater (the glass you looked at them through was below water level). The manatees seemed to enjoy showing off - there were several and they were constantly swimming past the glass. The weird thing was, manatees are almost hairless, so whenever they did that, you could see their big female private parts.

--------------------
Fools! You've over-estimated me!

Posts: 3745 | From: New York City | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
die daagliks phosdex
Monster Mashed Potatos & Grave-y


Icon 504 posted      Profile for die daagliks phosdex   Author's Homepage   E-mail die daagliks phosdex   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Electrotiger:
quote:
Lasted about three minutes and then he flopped back down and went to sleep - the female never even moved.
Three minutes, eh! That's gotta be some sort of record. I never saw him go for more than 30 seconds or so. Slam, bam, asante sana ma'am!
IIBC, lions in the wild have to copulate all the more frequently (as in, on average, between 45 seconds and three minutes between couplings) because of the female's estrous period being only about 72-75 hours' duration, and it's something not worth wasting time over.

--------------------
"Nie lees die hoofopskrifte--lees die daagliks phosdex in plaas ..."

Posts: 1316 | From: Winona, MN | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mad Jay
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mad Jay     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troodon:
As for animals in zoos, I was at Sea World in San Diego with my family, and there was a place where you could watch the manatees swim around underwater (the glass you looked at them through was below water level). The manatees seemed to enjoy showing off - there were several and they were constantly swimming past the glass. The weird thing was, manatees are almost hairless, so whenever they did that, you could see their big female private parts.

We had gone to the Seaworld down in Orlando, and they had a couple of manatees displayed simlarily. My wife loved them, and she was oohing and ahhing all over them, when one of them pooped. [lol]

--------------------
Nico Sasha
In between my father's fields;And the citadels of the rule; Lies a no-man's land which I must cross; To find my stolen jewel.

Posts: 4912 | From: VA | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Cervus
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Cervus   E-mail Cervus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
They have manatees at Sea World in Orlando? That seems...wrong somehow, considering that you can see them in the wild all over Florida, especially at Homosassa Springs.

--------------------
"There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen
Won't somebody please think of the adults!

Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mad Jay
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mad Jay     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Yup, they sure have

--------------------
Nico Sasha
In between my father's fields;And the citadels of the rule; Lies a no-man's land which I must cross; To find my stolen jewel.

Posts: 4912 | From: VA | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Rexodus
Deck the Malls


Icon 502 posted      Profile for Rexodus     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

You wouldn't call a tiger a lion, or a lion a cheetah, so why would you call an ape a monkey?

There is one difference between the examples you've given and the mokey/ape confusion. Phylogenetically speaking, the closest common ancestor for all true monkeys is also the ancestor for all apes. Taxonomists would say that "monkey" is not a phylogenetically coherent term unless it includes the apes. The same could not be said for cheetahs, lions, and tigers, which all have separate evolutionary lineages.

Not that phylogenetics should determine what every word in the English language means. Otherwise we'd all be "fish."

--------------------
"Your name is Thurmon Mermon?"

Posts: 244 | From: Chicago, IL | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Electrotiger
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Electrotiger   E-mail Electrotiger   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Taxonomists would say that "monkey" is not a phylogenetically coherent term unless it includes the apes. The same could not be said for cheetahs, lions, and tigers, which all have separate evolutionary lineages.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here; are you saying that a taxonomist would accept calling an ape a monkey, because they had genetically-similar ancestors?

I would maintain that one wouldn't call the genetically-similar precuror of apes and monkeys an ape or a monkey, because it was a different animal altogether.

I was using the example of tigers, lions and cheetahs because of their morphological similarities, the same sorts of similarities that monkeys and apes share.

The breakdown of species between monkeys and apes begins at their order, Primates. The breakdown of cats begins at their family, Felidae.

Lions and Tigers are both Panthera, which puts them in the same genus. I would say that qualifies them as having similar evolutionary lineages (along with cougars and jaguars). Cheetahs are atypical felines; they've got their own genus, Acinonyx, and were probably decendant from cats much smaller than the Panthera.

Again, I was using the comparison between the cats and primates because of the sharing of physical traits, which is what the average animal viewer associates (which is probably why misclassification with animals by the general public is so common).

--------------------
Mr. Sagan did not go too fars, If you just took the time to scan its,
You'd count billions and billions of stars, And billions and billions of planets.

Posts: 332 | From: Kansas City, MO | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Rexodus
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Rexodus     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Electrotiger:
The breakdown of species between monkeys and apes begins at their order, Primates. The breakdown of cats begins at their family, Felidae.

Lions and Tigers are both Panthera, which puts them in the same genus. I would say that qualifies them as having similar evolutionary lineages (along with cougars and jaguars). Cheetahs are atypical felines; they've got their own genus, Acinonyx, and were probably decendant from cats much smaller than the Panthera.

Sure, all the cats in Panthera have a similar lineage, but they're wholly distinct. In other words, every lion is more closely related to every other lion than to any tiger or jaguar or cheetah. (Check out this link - http://www.whozoo.org/mammals/Carnivores/catphylogeny.pdf)

Every monkey, however, is not necessarily more closely related to every other monkey than to any ape. Old world monkeys, such as baboons and macaques, are more closely related to apes than they are to new world monkeys. (http://www.whozoo.org/mammals/Primates/primatephylogeny.htm) So the breakdown between monkeys and apes doesn't begin at the order level. Within the order, there is a breakdown between different types of monkeys before a distinction between monkeys and apes is made.

Again, I'm not saying this should change the definitions of the words. A monkey is still a monkey and an ape is still an ape. (And a kiss is still a kiss.) I'm just saying there is a difference in the examples you used in your analogy.

Common names are notorious for their imprecision and arbitrariness; that's why scientists use Latin names based on phylogeny. It seems harsh to come down on laypersons for misusing common names when the scientific community itself has acknowledged their dodginess.


Edited for grammar and cogency. (First written early in the morning.)

--------------------
"Your name is Thurmon Mermon?"

Posts: 244 | From: Chicago, IL | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Liza
What's My Lime?


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Liza         Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by snopes:
The lions on Disney World's Jungle Safari ride at Animal Kingdom are fake.

The reason the lions never move is because they are sitting on an
air-conditioned rock.

The lions are real, and they do have an ac vent so that they'll rest where people on the ride can see them.

And they give them frozen rabbits. Like frozen fruit pops, only, you know, rabbits.

If you go to Animal Kingdom and have a chance to take the backstage tour, do it.

Liza

--------------------
You come into this world screaming, naked, and covered with blood. With any luck, things get better.

Posts: 122 | From: BFE, Florida | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Anarchy
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 1 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jynni:

I want to take each and everyone of the meerkats home. They were adorable - running around their exhibit - they would also watch you and come up to the glass to observe you further. [/QB]

Meerkats rock, in the local zoo here they live in an enclosure shaped like an old termite mound, usually you'll have one of them standing up there looking around, looks cute but I can't help but want to just push him over. Just a poke in the chest, of course he'd likely claw me to death, I'm a weakling.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ciro y Alicia
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 1 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Baggins:
quote:
Originally posted by jynni:
We got a huge growling yawn from the male who then lumbered over to the nearest female, turned her over and started goin' at it. Lasted about three minutes and then he flopped back down and went to sleep - the female never even moved.

Wow. I didn't know lions got married.
[lol] ROFLMAO - that was hilarious honey. I think I can relate to that poor lioness sometimes. - Yeah - that was funny!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Xia
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Xia   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I love to watch the felines whether they are moving or not... Actually it's almost more interesting to watch them when they are asleep, provided they are sleeping close to the fence. Since they're not moving you can examine them much more closely...

They also take much better photos (no blurry movement!)
 -
(taken by me at Brookfield Zoo, they were sleeping right near the glass)

--------------------
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

Posts: 2110 | From: Chicago, IL | Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Arts Myth
The First USA Noel


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Arts Myth   E-mail Arts Myth   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
It'd almost be worth the likely loss of the arm to rub that tummy...

Arts "good thing fur's bad for snicker-sneezes" Myth

--------------------
Stupid, stupid rat creatures! - Bone
"The missionaries told us not to cut ourselves. It displeases Jesus." - Elsie Clews Parsons, Kiowa Tales, quoted in The Mourner's Dance, Katherine Ashenburg

Posts: 695 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2