b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Greetings Cards For Any Occasion » Message 4067021

[challenge entry] ...

no idea

To clear this up, both platypus and echidna are marsupials. In turn, all marsupials are mammals. So my card is both zoologically  correct and highly entertaining.

From the Greetings Cards For Any Occasion challenge. See all 489 entries (closed)

(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:12, archived)
# that's very nice dear
have some bleach on the rocks.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:13, archived)
# I hope that asterisk is referring to the fact that a platypus is actually a marsupial...
Otherwise I shall be deeply hurt.

/reads bottom of card

You've done it now, you watermeloning cranberry.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:17, archived)
# marsupials are mammals
aren't they?
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:20, archived)
# Yes, they are
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:22, archived)
#
www.b3ta.com/board/4067082

and blinky bill's definition is highly inaccurate. You all learned about Australia from rolf harris, you twunts.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:23, archived)
# Mammals are to marsupials
as chavs are to humans.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:22, archived)
#  
Actually both the platypus and the echidna are mammals. They are members of the monotreme group of mammals. The platypus doesn't even have a pouch, although the echidna do.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:23, archived)
# Erm...
As mentioned below, I like your pic...

But have you ever read a book?
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:25, archived)
# a book?
m-a-r-s-u-p-i-a-l-s-a-r-e-m-a-m-m-a-l-s-y-o-u-r-e-t-a-r-d
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:31, archived)
#  
"mar·su·pi·al    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (m‰r-sp-l)
n.

Any of various nonplacental mammals of the order Marsupialia, including kangaroos, opossums, bandicoots, and wombats, found principally in Australia and the Americas."

Although I'm sure that all web content is wrong and you are right.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:32, archived)
# Next you'll be telling us that chavs are human.
But please don't be offended by my 2:30am drunken abuse.
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:35, archived)
# .
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:33, archived)
# and thus
started the great monotreme flame-war of '04 :)
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:37, archived)
# Graaaahh!!
FREEEEDOM!!!!
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:39, archived)
# but
..what about echidnas? Echidnas have feelings too you know. Heartless bastard..
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:18, archived)
# Echidnas are also marsupials.
When will you people learn?
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:18, archived)
# and monotremes
..I mean echidnas and platypi are monotremes AND marsupials that is..
I'll go back to sleep now

EDIT: pardon my manners - aside from the glaring and unforgivable zoological errors, that pic is rather woo :)
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:19, archived)
# As are crocodiles (monotremes, that is).
But don't let that stop you all from having your fun - see if they care.

edit: yes, I should also mention that the picture was nice...
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:21, archived)
# it says echidna's now
..and the image mod-time looks like it's 1 minute in the past, or am I going mad.
_and_ I've just found out that platypi aren't marsupials, much to my chagrin
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:26, archived)
# They are,
But there seem to be some very dubious definitions of marsupial on the interweb.

/keeps searching
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:28, archived)
# I always use
RFC 2229 :)
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:30, archived)
# Thankyou.
The platypi and echindas are much happier and can now rest.

*sighs contentedly*
(, Fri 17 Dec 2004, 16:32, archived)
# Sorry
Platipi and Echidnas are Monotremes. Not Marsupials. They're two distinct sub-classes.

Crocodiles are reptiles. Thus not monotremes. I will now sensitively refrain from using the word "retard", but know at least that I could.
(, Sat 18 Dec 2004, 18:28, archived)
# All depends who's taxonomy you decide to use...
...I mean really!

If the scientific community can't even decide on a basic number and naming of the kingdoms of all living things, who are we to argue over sub-species, eh?

It's a hairy thing with a beak, it lays eggs and it can't read, which is a bit of a shame as I am sure it would appriciate the effort if it could.
(, Mon 20 Dec 2004, 17:12, archived)