SANParks.org Forums

Hi Own, the above book is where i got the info from. I "also" like to research where ever, to in crease the all inquiring mind
Whether its true what the clever people say, we always accept

Get well soon:thumbs_up:

I prefer to have an active, wondrous mind myself, Philip. And, if I choose to, I love to question and see if the "facts" bear up to the scrutiny. Here, if I had the inclination, I'd examine the scientific method, and see things like sample distribution, sample size, outlying data, and so on. Newton didn't look at the apple and say - "Wow, what a rosy bulge; let's eat it before it rots!" No, he examined the apple from the time it left the tree till the time it smacked the ground, and then he reinvented maths!!

Own

The only animal you can eat before they are born and after they are dead is.....

Rooies, welcome back

The egg first or the "Bird"

Yes, I'd say the chicken (assuming, of course, that it is humans doing the eating; and bearing in mind that birds are hatched, not born ) Then again, you could say the ostrich, or, in certain parts of the world, ducks.

............but surely a "bird" is not an animal in the strictest definition of animal? An animal has 4 legs and normally breeds or lives on the land - most, but not all, are mammals (not all mammals are animals )
Therefore I would go for - Turtle. It has 4 legs; lays its eggs on the land - you can eat the eggs and the flesh of the dead animal. (These are also hatched OWN!)

Rooies - welcome back, good to see you on line again

I see you're hatching a favourable argument here, PNF. Turtles also count, indeed. However, an animal derives from the Latin, animalis, which means having breath, and which translates into the broader accepted definition of "a living organism which feeds on organic matter, typically having specialized sense organs and nervous system and able to respond rapidly to stimuli" (Oxford English Dictionary). So, broader than just four-legged animals.

Like your thinking OWN However that does enlarge the scope of Rooies question - now we have to consider reptiles; amphibians; arachnids etc.
Eish............! and it seemed such a simple question

PNF, I actually wonder if Sir Rooies actually considered all the nuances when posing the question, as it specifically asked for the only animal that can be consumed by humans prior to, and after, birth?

The trouble with this discussion is that it can go on ad infinitum and still we'd be
Perhaps we should wait for Rooies to put us out of our misery - unless some other 'mite has another answer!

HI Onewithnature and PNF, i could only find the following

Waiting for Rooies then ...

Thanks Philip1 - that quote actually complicates the situation as it adds more "types" to the definition of animal....

Rooies..............

We need your expert assitance

Jislaaik, you all are very technical . I was thinking of your common or garden variety of a plain old chicken. Nobody posted anything for about 22 days and I thought I would throw a simple question at you. OQ, so who wants to have a go at it? Remember what this quiz is all about.