# This List Of Animal Facts That Furries Don't Seem To Know



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

This was compiled by some of us on Crush Yiff Destroy as we picked out blatent screw ups in the furry fandom. Feel free to contribute to the list. 

1) There is no such species as a 'panther'. 'Panther' refers to either cougars, jaguars or leopards, the later of the two are members of the pantherinae taxonomic subfamily with a genetic melanistic coloring condition. There is the 'Florida Panther' however, a species of Puma but it isn't black at all. 

2) Male kangaroos do not have pouches. They are part of the female reproductive system and not present on the males. 

3) A vast amount of animal species are not digitigrade but rather plantigrade just like humans. This includes bears, raccoons, rabbits, skunks and many other species. 

4) The 'Timber Wolf' is not a bad ass, extra large version of a 'Wolf', it's just a nick name for your regular, mundane, ordinary, Canis Lupus 'wolf'. 

5) Siberian Tigers are not white, they're orange primarily. The exception being genetic mutations presented in some, but this is a deformity. 

6) 'Large Cats' including Lions, Tigers, Leopards, Snow Leopards, Jaguar and others only purr when they exhale, not when they both inhale and exhale like a house cat.

7) Male cows don't have udders

8) Rabbits don't have pads on the bottoms of their feet.

9) Rats/mice don't have furry ears or paws or 'nose pads' or fangs.

10) Antelope don't have antlers. They're not deer.

11) Carnivorous mammals only have four fangs. Two in the top and two in the bottom. They don't have a steel trap for a mouth.

12) Not all Hyenas are spotted hyenas. All hyenas are NOT psudo-hermaphrodites, only spotted hyenas are. They are also not even real hermaphrodites, the females merely have the ugliest vagina ever.

13) Cloven hooves are not horse hooves with a notch in the front. Equines are the only ungulate which have a single solid hoof-toe.

14) Female reindeer are the only deer that have antlers in winter.

15) Reindeer and Caribou are the same species.

16) Males do not go into 'heat'. 'Heat' does not just mean 'I'm horny, I wanna fuck'. It's part of the female estrous cycle, a cycle males do not have.

17) With a few exceptions, outside of captivity wolves do not live in packs with complicated hierarchies and rather live in nuclear family units. Every male wolf that isnâ€™t killed before breeding will become an â€˜alpha maleâ€™, as such, the term â€˜alpha maleâ€™ offers no useful information and is redundant.

18) 'Anthropos' is the Greek word for 'Human being'. 'Anthro-' is a Greek prefix for having the quality of being human.

19) All species of 'big cat' do not have slit pupils like small cats do, they have round pupils.


----------



## Gavrill (May 7, 2009)

Forgot to add that hyenas are neither dogs nor cats.

And that they're female-dominated.


----------



## paxil rose (May 7, 2009)

#6 should be obvious. #15 too.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> #6 should be obvious. #15 too.


You'd *think* so, huh?

#6 wasn't my submission, however #15 was and I've seen it demonstrated *multiple* times. :X


----------



## TheGreatCrusader (May 7, 2009)

You want to know why furries don't already know these, half of them they probably learned in high school biology? It's because most furries are stupid.


----------



## Kirbizard (May 7, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> #6 should be obvious.


I really, really wish someone would tell this to the people who make milk adverts.
The next time I see a female cow with a gruff masculine voice on TV, I'm going to cry. <(._.)>


----------



## Ruko (May 7, 2009)

> This List of Animal Facts That *90% of the population* Don't Seem to Know


fixed it for ya. 



2, 6, 8, 10, 15 are obvious. I feel for people who don't this.


----------



## paxil rose (May 7, 2009)

Does anyone remember that mini-scandal Nickelodeon had when they did that movie about a farm with a boy cow with udders and people threw a fit thinking they were making some stance on transexuals or something.


----------



## Ruko (May 7, 2009)

I don't think that would be limited to Nickelodeon, a LOT of cartoons do not understand males do not have udders. The 2006 movie, Barnyard, for example.


----------



## Kirbizard (May 7, 2009)

Maybe I missed it the first time I looked, but why are there two 5s? :c


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

Ruko said:


> fixed it for ya.
> 2, 6, 8, 15 are obvious. I feel for people who don't this.


 
Yes but one would kinda expect the furries to have spent 5 minutes reading the wikipedia page on the species they chose for a fursona.  Also, not including the animal traits on the fursona is no big deal, that's a creative issue.  It's when furries make the extra effort to put on 'animal traits' to make it so 'murr, purry animally!' and get it ass backwards wrong because they couldn't do 5mins of research.

We could go on FA and count all the rabbits and bears and other species that are drawn digitigrade just because the artists think it's 'more animaly and accurate!  Not like dirty hyoomins!' when the species infact are plantigrade.  http://www.ursamajorawards.org/images/UrsaMajor-small.gif  Or maybe we could just ask the Ursa Major awards guys what THEY were thinking. |:


----------



## Ruko (May 7, 2009)

Kirbizard said:


> Maybe I missed it the first time I looked, but why are there two 5s? :c



haha, I didn't even notice. I'm probably not the only one.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

18) Snow leopards can't count. :X


----------



## Ruko (May 7, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Yes but one would kinda expect the furries to have spent 5 minutes reading the wikipedia page on the species they chose for a fursona.  Also, not including the animal traits on the fursona is no big deal, that's a creative issue.  It's when furries make the extra effort to put on 'animal traits' to make it so 'murr, purry animally!' and get it ass backwards wrong because they couldn't do 5mins of research.
> 
> We could go on FA and count all the rabbits and bears and other species that are drawn digitigrade just because the artists think it's 'more animaly and accurate!  Not like dirty hyoomins!' when the species infact are plantigrade.  http://www.ursamajorawards.org/images/UrsaMajor-small.gif  Or maybe we could just ask the Ursa Major awards guys what THEY were thinking. |:



well, most furries* are teens in middle/high school. I doubt they would even know what plantigrade is...


* (so it seems on this particular site)


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

In male _Kangaroos_, the _balls hangs in front of the penis_. The cock is the one in the back.


----------



## HoneyPup (May 7, 2009)

The "boy cow" thing is something that  annoys me. It's amusing when children say it and then I realize that this: 





> a LOT of cartoons do not understand males do not have udders. The 2006 movie, Barnyard, for example.


is why they think that and am saddened. More proof that cartoons make kids stupid.



AshleyAshes said:


> We could go on FA and count all the rabbits and bears and other species that are drawn digitigrade just because the artists think it's 'more animaly and accurate!  Not like dirty hyoomins!' when the species infact are plantigrade.  http://www.ursamajorawards.org/images/UrsaMajor-small.gif  Or maybe we could just ask the Ursa Major awards guys what THEY were thinking. |:


wow, that ursa major bear is horrible. Those legs don't even look right.


----------



## Gavrill (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> In male _Kangaroos_, the _balls hangs in front of the penis_. The cock is the one in the back.


That's something that I can go my whole life without knowing or wanting to know, really.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

chicken breast don't have nipples


----------



## Gavrill (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> chicken breast don't have nipples


Maybe because only mammals have nipples?

That's why they're called _mammals._


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> That's something that I can go my whole life without knowing or wanting to know, really.



Sorry you're too late.
Want some comfort food?


----------



## Gavrill (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> Sorry you're too late.
> Want some comfort food?


As long as it's not some weird vore food.


----------



## Bellini Tabloid (May 7, 2009)

I'm your local Zoologist on these forums, if u wanna know anything animal basis, then go ahead and ask :3


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> As long as it's not some weird vore food.



Milk and Cookies.


----------



## HoneyPup (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> chicken breast don't have nipples


and neither do reptiles. 
Scalies and avians shouldn't really have breasts.


----------



## Shadowwolf (May 7, 2009)

Amen to all of this. 

It's hard to think of anything more to add, because these are things that should be so obvious to anyone who likes animals enough to read up on them.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 7, 2009)

There is no rule saying that what is drawn/made a fursona HAS to be realistic, It is called imagination which appears most in this thread lacks alot of. Where does it say that an artist has to draw an animal precisely like the real thing and go by real anatomy?, It doesn't an artist can draw what ever the feck they want and people can amke their fursonas what ever the feck they want. 

Yes they may not draw an animal correct, but then, drawing animals on two legs isn't strictly correct either cause animals walk on FOUR legs, yet this point has been overlooked.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> and neither do reptiles.
> Scalies and avians shouldn't really have breasts.



Thank you!
At least you got it.
However Although unnatural the drawings I've seen of birds/reptiles with breast look mighty um um cute?


----------



## Zaaz (May 7, 2009)

If antelope don't have antlers, then what do they have?

Z


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

Zaaz said:


> If antelope don't have antlers, then what do they have?
> 
> Z



blow horns


----------



## Shadowwolf (May 7, 2009)

Zaaz, they just have horns.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

NO species except humans even has boobs when not pregnant or nursing. The whole 'boobs' thing is just universally appled when doing the whole 'anthropomorphizing' thing, human traits. So adding such a trait to any species even if not mammalian makes sense.

Really, the issue is not about FAILING to apply animal traits to an anthro character but rather when they do apply animal traits for what ever reason they wind up getting them wrong.  You don't have to draw pouches on ANY anthro kangaroo, it's no big deal.  Your talking bipedal cats don't even have to purr.  It's not 'OH!  You forgot this important fact about the animal!  You fail!'.  Hell 'furry' is basicly nothing but taking a human character and slapping fur, a funny shaped skull and a tail on it.  But when the artist or writer is making the specific effort to put on animal traits and he demonstrates a basic failure to understand these traits, THAT is where the problem lies.  That is where it becomes just flat out stupid.

And this brings up another point for me to add to the list.

18) 'Anthropos' is the Greek word for 'Human being'. 'Anthro-' is a Greek prefix for having the quality of being human.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> NO species except humans even has boobs when not pregnant or nursing. The whole 'boobs' thing is just universally appled when doing the whole 'anthropomorphizing' thing, human traits. So adding such a trait to any species even if not mammalian makes sense.
> 
> Really, the issue is not about FAILING to apply animal traits to an anthro character but rather when they do apply animal traits for what ever reason they wind up getting them wrong.
> 
> ...




Sorry dude, can't agree with you about the boobs.
There's this lady where I work that have two big cantaloupes.
She isn't pregnant or has ever been (so she says).
I guess she's getting prepared.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> Sorry dude, can't agree with you about the boobs.
> There's this lady where I work that have two big cantaloupes.
> She isn't pregnant or has ever been (so she says).
> I guess she's getting prepared.


 
...Re-read what I said...

"No species *except* humans even has boobs when not pregnant or nursing."


----------



## Shadowwolf (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> Sorry dude, can't agree with you about the boobs.
> There's this lady where I work that have two big cantaloupes.
> She isn't pregnant or has ever been (so she says).
> I guess she's getting prepared.



I...believe she clearly stated 'EXCEPT HUMANS' in her post.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 7, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> NO species except humans even has boobs when not pregnant or nursing. The whole 'boobs' thing is just universally appled when doing the whole 'anthropomorphizing' thing, human traits. So adding such a trait to any species even if not mammalian makes sense.
> 
> Really, the issue is not about FAILING to apply animal traits to an anthro character but rather when they do apply animal traits for what ever reason they wind up getting them wrong.
> 
> ...



Actually the idea is animals with human characteristics. all the artists are doing is depicting their drawings how THEY want to. Although i agree, What is drawn isn't strictly speaking correct, but then if artists drew things spot in it would show NO imagination, and to me, would be pretty damn boreing.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> ...Re-read what I said...
> 
> "No species *except* humans even has boobs when not pregnant or nursing."



You're right!
Sorry.
I must have been concentrating on the word bonbon.


----------



## HoneyPup (May 7, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> There is no rule saying that what is drawn/made a fursona HAS to be realistic, It is called imagination which appears most in this thread lacks alot of. Where does it say that an artist has to draw an animal precisely like the real thing and go by real anatomy?, It doesn't an artist can draw what ever the feck they want and people can amke their fursonas what ever the feck they want.
> 
> Yes they may not draw an animal correct, but then, drawing animals on two legs isn't strictly correct either cause animals walk on FOUR legs, yet this point has been overlooked.





RandyDarkshade said:


> Actually the idea is animals with human characteristics. all the artists are doing is depicting their drawings how THEY want to. Although i agree, What is drawn isn't strictly speaking correct, but then if artists drew things spot in it would show NO imagination, and to me, would be pretty damn boreing.



There is a difference between having imagination and lack of knowledge of the species you are drawing.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> There is a difference between having imagination and lack of knowledge of the species you are drawing.


 
If this thread was about nitpicking for 'super realism' it would included things like 'Cats don't have wings', 'You can't be a demon and a vampire at the same time', 'it's statistically uncommon to have a heart shape in your fur patterns' and such like that. It's all about purposefully applying an animal trait to make the character more 'animally' and getting it wrong'.

As much fun as a thread bitching about furry tropes and cliches would be, that's not what this is.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> There is a difference between having imagination and lack of knowledge of the species you are drawing.



prettylilpup you can keep your honey dews.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> If this thread was about nitpicking for 'super realism' it would included things like 'Cats don't have wings', 'You can't be a demon and a vampire at the same time', it is statistically uncommon to have a heart shape in your fur patterns' and such like that. It's all about purposefully applying an animal trait to make the character more 'animally' and getting it wrong'.
> 
> As much fun as a thread bitching about furry tropes and cliches would be, that's not what this is.




Oh you me facts like Spiders are not insects.
Okay.


Oh, I almost forgot ,Red Bull Give You Wings.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 7, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> There is a difference between having imagination and lack of knowledge of the species you are drawing.



Fair enough point. I am only partly seeing everyones point here cause i am dead tired, so ima skip off to bed and come back to this thread when i am awake enough.


----------



## HoneyPup (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> prettylilpup you can keep your honey dews.


----------



## SPICE (May 7, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


>



sigh.
your character can keep the boobs.


----------



## HoneyPup (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> sigh.
> your character can keep the boobs.


lol I sorta thought that's what you meant.


----------



## Attaman (May 7, 2009)

Other good ones include:

Animals do not respect the "Balance of Nature".

Murder is not unheard of within natural ecosystems.

Animals will rape, and not just within their own species.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

Attaman said:


> Other good ones include:
> 
> Animals do not respect the "Balance of Nature".
> 
> ...


 
This is a case of pointing out facts which arn't necessarily used in creation of furry characters.  That isn't the point of of this thread, to point out every little fact that they 'missed' like some little douchebag but to criticize the fandom's inclusion of traits and then getting them wrong.

I mean, the stuff you point out I think is tossed out when the animals start talking, wearing pants and playing Nintendo. ^^;


----------



## Attaman (May 7, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> This is a case of pointing out facts which arn't necessarily used in creation of furry characters.  That isn't the point of of this thread, to point out every little fact that they 'missed' like some little douchebag but to criticize the fandom's inclusion of traits and then getting them wrong.
> 
> I mean, the stuff you point out I think is tossed out when the animals start talking, wearing pants and playing Nintendo. ^^;


Colorblindness, then?  Many Furry Characters seem to lack that.

Then there's the fact that many animals that seem to be tracking a scent have their heads down low to the ground, not high in the sky.

Perhaps that most animal tails are not prehensile?


----------



## Kirbizard (May 7, 2009)

SPICE said:


> Milk and Cookies.


Where the milk is oddly thick and salty and the cookies have ears and tail?

I'll pass. <(>_o)^


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

Attaman said:


> Colorblindness, then? Many Furry Characters seem to lack that.
> 
> Then there's the fact that many animals that seem to be tracking a scent have their heads down low to the ground, not high in the sky.


 
Okay.  I'm going to point this out one more time.  It's not about not including the animal facts.  There is no requirement to put every species specific trait on your pants wearing, word talking, Nintendo playing fox.  Why not ignore the fact that the species is colorblind?  *Foxes also can't play Nintendo.*

It's when those creating the charaters add in the animal traits for a specific purpose of accuracy and then get those traits completely wrong that it's just stupid.

So for colorblindness, it'd be like 'Oh, my character is colorblinde cause animals are colorblind!' and the species their fursona is, infact, is NOT color blind.  Then it's 'HA HA HA, stupid'.  But it's totally reasonable to NOT make the cahracter colorblind at all, cause for gods sake, *he can play Nintendo.*


----------



## Ozriel (May 7, 2009)

More facts:

-Maned wolves aren't "True" canines, and in no way their close relatives are the Fox or wolf.

-Bats do not have long snouts and look like canines.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> More facts:
> 
> -Maned wolves aren't "True" canines, and in no way their close relatives are the Fox or wolf.


 
No, the maned wolf isn't a true wolf but it is a 'true canine'. The maned wolf is not a member of the Canis genus, however nither is the fox which is a member of the Vulpes genus. The maned wolf is a member of the Chrysocyon genus. So the maned wolf is as related to the wolf as the fox is related to the wolf, they are all under the Caninae subfamily and are all canines.

The maned wolf is not a wolf however, it just has the name 'wolf' in it's name. Or, as Dr. House would say; "It's not lupus." 

It's important to note though that the fox is not closely related to the wolf or the entire Canis genus at all, they fullfill different biological roles and there is no evidence that a wolf or subspecies of wolf can even breed with a fox.  (However as they don't overlap much in biological role, it's not necessarily something that's been frequently 'put to the test'.)


----------



## Defcat (May 7, 2009)

I knew all the facts about the cats at least.


----------



## Rehka (May 7, 2009)

Quoted from someones journal I read recently:



> PEOPLE. The "knot" isn't present in canines until AFTER EJACULATION, and at NO POINT is the female EVER "knotted" by having that disgusting bulge thrust painfully into her. It forms inside, keeps her in place to ensure fertilization, then goes away.


----------



## KitXune (May 7, 2009)

Rehka said:


> Quoted from someones journal I read recently:



You read some weird-ass journals...


----------



## Meeew (May 7, 2009)

...since when is furrydom an intellectual movement, I thought we were all here for yiff and conventions?


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

You gotta be setting the bar pretty damn low to considder the stuff I listed as being 'intellectual'. :X


----------



## KitXune (May 7, 2009)

Meeew said:


> I thought we were all here for yiff and conventions?



I'm just here for the art.

Hoo boy, that was pretty stereotypical, wasn't it?


----------



## Giorgio Gabriel (May 7, 2009)

Have we mentioned that Dragons, Lizards, and other reptilian creatures cannot have breasts because then they'd be mammals?



KitXune said:


> I'm just here for the art.
> 
> Hoo boy, that was pretty stereotypical, wasn't it?



It sure was!


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 7, 2009)

Giorgio Gabriel said:


> Have we mentioned that Dragons, Lizards, and other reptilian creatures cannot have breasts because then they'd be mammals?


 
http://forums.furaffinity.net/showpost.php?p=991276&postcount=31

Not only that, also mentioned why that doesn't go on the list.


----------



## Giorgio Gabriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> http://forums.furaffinity.net/showpost.php?p=991276&postcount=31
> 
> Not only that, also mentioned why that doesn't go on the list.





AshleyAshes said:


> Hell 'furry' is basicly nothing but taking a human character and slapping fur, a funny shaped skull and a tail on it. [/URL]



There we go.  Worry no longer about what 'furry' is, your answer lies here.  Brilliant post, it should be stickied.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

Giorgio Gabriel said:


> There we go. Worry no longer about what 'furry' is, your answer lies here. Brilliant post, it should be stickied.


 
But then the hardcore furries and the lifestylers will letterbomb me!


----------



## jagdwolf (May 8, 2009)

I think you need to delve a bit deeper into item 17.  Most wolves do live in packs, and yes the are a family/social oriented group, but there is always an alpha male and female.  there are beta's who one day may become alpha's or break off and start their own pack if the alpha "trait is present" or they just stay beta's.  then there are subordinates and finally one omega.  

They care for thier young as a collective family but there is a hierarchy.  And not its not breeding that makes an alpha male.  Its a whole lot more than that.  But what the hell do I know, I have only recovered them for 27 years and have a list of books as well as live right at the doorsteps to yellowstone and know the dutchers.


----------



## Giorgio Gabriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> But then the hardcore furries and the lifestylers will letterbomb me!



There is that.  I suppose they'll just have to deal with.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> No, the maned wolf isn't a true wolf but it is a 'true canine'. The maned wolf is not a member of the Canis genus, however nither is the fox which is a member of the Vulpes genus. The maned wolf is a member of the Chrysocyon genus. So the maned wolf is as related to the wolf as the fox is related to the wolf, they are all under the Caninae subfamily and are all canines.
> 
> The maned wolf is not a wolf however, it just has the name 'wolf' in it's name. Or, as Dr. House would say; "It's not lupus."
> 
> It's important to note though that the fox is not closely related to the wolf or the entire Canis genus at all, they fullfill different biological roles and there is no evidence that a wolf or subspecies of wolf can even breed with a fox.  (However as they don't overlap much in biological role, it's not necessarily something that's been frequently 'put to the test'.)



Forgive my sarcasm, but DUH.
The closest relative to a "Kalak" as the natives of South America would call them is the Bush Dog...Which isn't a "True Canis". 

Furries tend to put the "Maned Wolf" in the category of "Fox" or "Wolf".


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

jagdwolf said:


> I think you need to delve a bit deeper into item 17. Most wolves do live in packs, and yes the are a family/social oriented group, but there is always an alpha male and female. there are beta's who one day may become alpha's or break off and start their own pack if the alpha "trait is present" or they just stay beta's. then there are subordinates and finally one omega.
> 
> They care for thier young as a collective family but there is a hierarchy. And not its not breeding that makes an alpha male. Its a whole lot more than that. But what the hell do I know, I have only recovered them for 27 years and have a list of books as well as live right at the doorsteps to yellowstone and know the dutchers.


 
http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/mammals/alstat/index.htm

This research here claims that previous research on the hirearchies of wolf packs has been grossly inaccurate and largely based on observation of captive animals where they're more or less stuck together like Lord Of The Flies.

There is no signifigance to the 'alpha male', wolves live in nuclear family units, two adults and the offspring, the surviving offspring will eventually seperate and form a family of their own with a member of the opposite sex that they encounter. There is no hirearchy, there are no alpha and beta males in the sense that it's traditionally come to be known. Though there are exceptions where large packs do exist but they are just that, exceptions.



Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Furries tend to put the "Maned Wolf" in the category of "Fox" or "Wolf".


Explain to me why you are even putting the fox in the same category as the wolf then?  Or at least your wording is suggesting that you see the wolf and fox as similar but the maned wolf as not.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/mammals/alstat/index.htm
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dude, I am not.
I have been studying Taxonomy, and I know that the Vulpes and the Canis genus are far apart from each other just as Earth and Neptune are far apart. I wasn't putting them in the same class.


-eyeroll-

People tend to classify Kalaks as the same as either foxes or wolves, which they are not. Kalaks aren't in the sense True canines or related to Foxes.

Just in case anyone asks about the word kalak:
Kalak is a special word by the native Toba people for "Maned Wolf"


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

I actually totally fucked up my post and had to edit it, and you apparently read my pre-fucked up one. ^^  What I was trying to say was your wording suggested that you thought wolves and foxes were related, especially when you said 'not true canines like foxes and wolves'.  More so, 'Canine' is defined as the members of the Canidae family, which includes foxes, maned wolves and wolves.

Your wording is very confusing. :/

Ontop of that, Wikipedia lists the Maned Wolf as being catagorized under 'True Dogs'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canidae


----------



## Meeew (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> You gotta be setting the bar pretty damn low to consider the stuff I listed as being 'intellectual'. :X



Intellectual because it's not stuff everybody knows, or to be more precise facts that no one actually cares to retain. 

Furrydom isn't logical, no one wants it to be logical, it's an escape from reality as much as it is a pasttime.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> I actually totally fucked up my post and had to edit it, and you apparently read my pre-fucked up one. ^^  What I was trying to say was your wording suggested that you thought wolves and foxes were related, especially when you said 'not true canines like foxes and wolves'.  More so, 'Canine' is defined as the members of the Canidae family, which includes foxes, maned wolves and wolves.
> 
> Your wording is very confusing. :/
> 
> ...



Sorry if I confused you, I am tired..

In biology terms, a "True Canine" is referred to any canine under the genus "Canis", such as Canis latrans or Canis Lupus. Foxes and Maned wolves are canines...just not "true" canines.


----------



## Leostale (May 8, 2009)

Most Bird Can hide their Head under their wing.
Some Bird Puff up their feather for insulating heat. (they Look Like A Feathery Ball with feet)
Some Bird Eat some other bird's Egg


----------



## AirGuardwolf (May 8, 2009)

HA I new all these. I better since wildlife biology is part of my degree! But seriously, i think more furs should pay attention to RL animal issues and subjects instead of just the art and fantasy. Furs could make a difference in the human understanding of the animal world, the environment and the interactions between the wild and civilization.


----------



## HotActionYiffFur (May 8, 2009)

Birds lay eggs, unlike the common misconception that they too give birth, but in a bird hospital.


----------



## Seas (May 8, 2009)

I admit I smiled a little on the "nuclear family units" .

For a bit more serious comment , about no.18, antropo means human, anthropomorphic means something of human form, so it can be interpreted as "humanized animal" .


----------



## AirGuardwolf (May 8, 2009)

HotActionYiffFur said:


> Birds lay eggs, unlike the common misconception that they too give birth, but in a bird hospital.



Yea. but have you really ever seen a baby pigeon?


----------



## Ceuper (May 8, 2009)

20) Other animals are not bipedal and capable of human-like intelligence and speech.

Oops, we all fucked up. 

Seriously though, I get your point. Most people are woefully uneducated and I wish everyone knew these things - and a hell of a lot more, too. There has to be freedom for creativity, though. 




Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> -Bats do not have long snouts and look like canines.



Not true. Never seen a fruit bat, or flying fox?


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

AirGuardwolf said:


> Furs could make a difference in the human understanding of the animal world, the environment and the interactions between the wild and civilization.


 
Probably not but it wouldn't hurt for furries to crack open the wikipedia page for their fursona species or any other character they're working on.  There's actually potentially useful stuff about the species that a person might not know which could prove interesting towards characteriziation.  "Oh that's cool, I should remember that one, I had no idea."

Honestly even I assumed hyena's were canine in relation when writing something, opened up wikipdia while writing it out, learned that I was screwing up and that they are closer related to cats then but QUITE distantly.  Not that every trait has to tossed in for some absurd pursuit of 'total realistic accuracy' but there can be some good stuff you can learn.

I'm actually quite convinced that at least HALF of the people with panther fursonas have no idea that there is no species as 'panther', but the fact that they are basicly dark colored members of other species could be totally useful.  The black leopard born amongst a family of leopards that are otherwise orange with black spots?  There's oppertunities for interesting family history there.

...Ha ha ha!  Furries... Well thought our fursona characterization... Man, do I have my head in the clouds or WHAT?  Ha h.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

Ceuper said:


> 20) Other animals are not bipedal and capable of human-like intelligence and speech.
> 
> Oops, we all fucked up.
> 
> ...



Yes.

And I am speaking of those who draw a bat as if the whole head was a dog and call it a bat. Not a lot pay attention to the nose and the eyes and at times the ears.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

Oh come on, all furry art starts off by drawing a dog.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Probably not but it wouldn't hurt for furries to crack open the wikipedia page for their fursona species or any other character they're working on.  There's actually potentially useful stuff about the species that a person might not know which could prove interesting towards characteriziation.  "Oh that's cool, I should remember that one, I had no idea."
> 
> Honestly even I assumed hyena's were canine in relation when writing something, opened up wikipdia while writing it out, learned that I was screwing up and that they are closer related to cats then but QUITE distantly.  Not that every trait has to tossed in for some absurd pursuit of 'total realistic accuracy' but there can be some good stuff you can learn.
> 
> ...



No not a lot do. it is either Black Jaguar, leopard...or "Florida panthers" which most call puma...or cougar.



AshleyAshes said:


> Oh come on, all furry art starts off by drawing a dog.



But once you get to drawing other species, it gets more complex than drawing just a "Dog".


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

http://panthersociety.org/faq.html#_Is_there_a_1

The Flordia Panther Society asserts that there's never been a documented case of melanistic Flordia Panther, so all Florida Panther's come in 'tan'.  Granted, being a sub-species of puma and puma's being able to be melanistic it's not improbable, just never documented.

It's a linguistic mess isn't it?  The puma's can be panthers but the Florida Panther, a subspecies of puma, has never been a panther. XD


----------



## krisCrash (May 8, 2009)

How about "most birds don't have dicks"
and lizards only have one hole
and non-mammals don't have nipples or breasts? Marsupials wouldn't either since that goes in the marsupium. But that goes under anthropormorphization

big cats don't have slit pupils either, right?


AshleyAshes said:


> 12) Not all Hyenas are spotted hyenas. All hyenas are NOT psudo-hermaphrodites, only spotted hyenas are. They are also not even real hermaphrodites, the females merely have the ugliest vagina ever.


(you misspelled pseudo.. and you know, maybe generally reword this part)

It's a pseudo-penis!
There are other mammals with this, 


			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> spotted hyena, squirrel monkey, lemur, and binturong. The labia of the spider monkey are elongated and may be similarly confused during display.


However, in general, Wikipedia may NOT be the best source of information. Good place to start but do back up the info if you are serious.

I was gonna say the bat thing toooo
but ok. Still gonna post the picture
http://www.northrup.org/Photos/bat/low/fox-bat (18).jpg daaaw

Oddly I always think black leopard when people say panther, the jaguar is a CAR to most people.


----------



## Sernion (May 8, 2009)

Another fact: Wolves do not howl at the full moon. Its just an urban myth.

So please, stop annoying your neighbors every half month.


----------



## Krazoa (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> 6) 'Large Cats' including Lions, Tigers, Leopards, Snow Leopards, Jaguar and others only purr when they exhale, not when they both inhale and exhale like a house cat.



That fact is not true, the only big cat that purrs is the Cheetah

Wanna know how i got this information feel free to ask


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

Right, i am now wide awake and have thought of one i don't think has been mentioned.

Not all animals have eyes in the front of their head, some have them in the sides such as some rodents like, mice, rats and squirrels. Yet i have seen a hell of a lot of these animals drawn with eyes at the front of their heads.

Although i think one reason for this would be because putting eyes at the front is much easier to draw.......maybe?


----------



## MattyK (May 8, 2009)

I think our "Flamethrower" of a Friend might know more along these lines, eh Zeke?


----------



## Gavrill (May 8, 2009)

Krazoa said:


> That fact is not true, the only big cat that purrs is the Cheetah
> 
> Wanna know how i got this information feel free to ask


Nicely done, I almost overlooked that.

Big cats can't purr, only small cats. Big cats growl/roar/etc.


----------



## Mojotaian (May 8, 2009)

All i can really say is meh...
Anthropomorphic beings (as many think of them) don't actually exist full stop... so if something's going to go a bit far from reality... all i can really say is "Cool, next topic"


----------



## jagdwolf (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/mammals/alstat/index.htm
> 
> This research here claims that previous research on the hirearchies of wolf packs has been grossly inaccurate and largely based on observation of captive animals where they're more or less stuck together like Lord Of The Flies.
> 
> ...


 
Nice article thats almost 20 years old observing wolves on an island where inbreeding has occured and the packs have no place to expand too as well as limited genetic diversity.  But still interesting reading.  However, living in a state where they love/hate wolves, as well as living 60 miles from Yellowstone National Park where they have done current and extensive research, NOT in a zoo like setting but in the wild, tends to refute that article.  

I don't say that those wolves on that island have not adapted to the situations, but that the data is old and more research has been done.  

But to the original post?  um, were in a fantasy world here.  Though I would love to become a wolf in form, cause I think most humans and their "morality" suck imo, I know I can't, not yet at least.  Maybe the next life time.  But we dream here of something we want to be, in our own perception of what that would be like, and what we think is fun.   There are a lot of furries here who have several persona's and one I know of who can't settle on one persona for more than a week or so!  

Its called dreaming and imigination.  Something that has been openly  restriced from the youth of today.  "Dragons aren't real, no go play your xbox, Cows can't stand up and don't eat ice cream cones, draw them the way they are ment to be."  etc.

Open your mind a hair more and let the furry out.   Might just have some fun while your doing it.


----------



## Kitsune Dzelda (May 8, 2009)

jagdwolf said:


> Its called dreaming and imigination. Something that has been openly restriced from the youth of today. "Dragons aren't real, no go play your xbox, Cows can't stand up and don't eat ice cream cones, draw them the way they are ment to be." etc.
> 
> Open your mind a hair more and let the furry out. Might just have some fun while your doing it.


 
Its a beautiful statement that makes me want to cry.  Its okay to be Kitsune, even if you have no idea what they are like, you simply want to BE them and see the world as you think they might see it.

I mean yes, Research and analysis add greatly to these impressions, but we dont need to be so dependent of facts that it hinders what we accept as real or not and therefore hampers our imagination.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

MattyK said:


> I think our "Flamethrower" of a Friend might know more along these lines, eh Zeke?



She might, yes.




			
				Kitsune Dzelda said:
			
		

> I mean yes, Research and analysis add greatly to these impressions, but we dont need to be so dependent of facts that it hinders what we accept as real or not and therefore hampers our imagination.



Reasearch is important when doing a creature and bringing it to life with your own imagination, even if it isn't real. it's okay to be a dragon, but please do some research before you make an attempt to bastardize it and fuck it over worse than a dirty Mexican prostitute. If you truly adore the mythology of the creature or that of a real animal, don't be lazy and do some research.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

Sernion said:


> Another fact: Wolves do not howl at the full moon. Its just an urban myth.
> 
> So please, stop annoying your neighbors every half month.



In my neighborhood, such antics will get you shot.


AshleyAshes said:


> http://panthersociety.org/faq.html#_Is_there_a_1
> 
> The Flordia Panther Society asserts that there's never been a documented case of melanistic Flordia Panther, so all Florida Panther's come in 'tan'.  Granted, being a sub-species of puma and puma's being able to be melanistic it's not improbable, just never documented.
> 
> It's a linguistic mess isn't it?  The puma's can be panthers but the Florida Panther, a subspecies of puma, has never been a panther. XD



If there was a case, it would have to be a ver rare genetic mutation or a man-made genetic mutation.


----------



## Kitsune Dzelda (May 8, 2009)

I guess what I should say is that your love for your favorite creatures should inspire you to learn more about them instead of the other way around.

AKA the way schools do it.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Big cats can't purr, only small cats. Big cats growl/roar/etc.


  Except possibly the Snow Leopard, a big cat that can't roar.  Though this is debatable because it's position in the taxonomic tree is debatable, long catagorized as genus Uncia recent genetic research is placing the snow leopard somewhere in the Panthera genus which would make it a "Great Cats" genus.

Though I prefer them as Uncia Uncia, cause then I get to say stupid shit like 'Species so nice, they named it twice'.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Except possibly the Snow Leopard, a big cat that can't roar.  Though this is debatable because it's position in the taxonomic tree is debatable, long catagorized as genus Uncia recent genetic research is placing the snow leopard somewhere in the Panthera genus which would make it a "Great Cats" genus.
> 
> Though I prefer them as Uncia Uncia, cause then I get to say stupid shit like 'Species so nice, they named it twice'.



They say it can't due to lacking a specific thingamajigga.


----------



## Ratte (May 8, 2009)

Brown rats have hairs on their ears.  V:
Black rats have mostly bare ears.  :V


----------



## Kitsune Dzelda (May 8, 2009)

Rats are cute in general, unless theyre from New York or Chicago.  Then theyre nasty.  And mean.  And resistant to Rade.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

Kitsune Dzelda said:


> Rats are cute in general, unless theyre from New York or Chicago.  Then theyre nasty.  And mean.  And resistant to Rade.



I like rodents . Mice, Rats, Beavers, Rabbits, Squirrels etc etc.


----------



## Ratte (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Though I prefer them as Uncia Uncia, cause then I get to say stupid shit like 'Species so nice, they named it twice'.



Like Rattus rattus.  <3


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I like rodents . Mice, Rats, Beavers, Rabbits, Squirrels etc etc.



Rats are cute. 

Black Squirrels are mysterious...like ninjas.


----------



## Kitsune Dzelda (May 8, 2009)

So are Kitsune.  You never know who or what might be a Kitsune in Japan by the research Ive conducted.  Except people who are Christian, which is why I find it ironic to associate myself with them.


----------



## Ratte (May 8, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Rats are cute.
> 
> Black Squirrels are mysterious...like ninjas.



Inb4 Zero the Kamikaze Squirrel

(not black, but he's a ninja)


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

Kitsune Dzelda said:


> So are Kitsune.  You never know who or what might be a Kitsune in Japan by the research Ive conducted.  Except people who are Christian, which is why I find it ironic to associate myself with them.



Same with Coyote.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

Ratte said:


> Inb4 Zero the Kamikaze Squirrel
> 
> (not black, but he's a ninja)



If ypu see the Black squirrels in virginia, you'd be amazed.
They are known to steal lunches from under your nose. There was one time in Elementary scool, a kid in my class had caught one in a lunch box.


----------



## Kitsune Dzelda (May 8, 2009)

Wow! That sounds wonderful! Did he have it for lunch?


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

Kitsune Dzelda said:


> Wow! That sounds wonderful! Did he have it for lunch?



No...He had to release it...which lead to him geting stitches and rabies shots.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Rats are cute.
> 
> Black Squirrels are mysterious...like ninjas.



I'm not mysterious o.o. Am i?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> No...He had to release it...which lead to him geting stitches and rabies shots.



Black squirrels are apparently the more viscious ones. Black squirrels aren't actually a species, they are a direct varient of the grey squirrel.

EDIT: Experts believe it is a genetic trait, the same type of gene that decides our hair color. I also know much more about my chosen species ^^.


----------



## Shadowwolf (May 8, 2009)

Well whadaya know, I thought of some more.

. Rabbits are not rodents.
. Deer do not have any front teeth on their top jaw.
. Horses, deer, cows, goats, sheep, and pigs, are not 'digitigrade' but rather 'unguligrade,' meaning they are "walking on fingernails," or rather the very tippy-tip of their toes which are capped in hooves.
. True wolves *do not have* rear dewclaws in the wild.

And to the sticklers who still think (I don't know how this myth started) that the only large cat that can purr is the cheetah - no. Cougars do it too, and I don't see why the others wouldn't be able to either.



RandyDarkshade said:


> Black squirrels are apparently the more viscious ones.



HELLS YES THEY ARE. Holy crap, of all animals I've come into contact with, the gray squirrels are something akin to a much, much smaller boar raccoon. And you do NOT wanna be around them when they are injured and angry. Even when wearing falconry gloves, they can hurt you bad, I had more marks from them than any other animal. Fricken' fast too... And they kill all our native chipmunks.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Black squirrels are apparently the more viscious ones. Black squirrels aren't actually a species, they are a direct varient of the grey squirrel.
> 
> EDIT: Experts believe it is a genetic trait, the same type of gene that decides our hair color. I also know much more about my chosen species ^^.



A genetic trait that gives them black fur, eat fish and ninja attack 4th graders.



			
				shadowwolf said:
			
		

> Well whadaya know, I thought of some more.
> 
> . Rabbits are not rodents.
> . Deer do not have any front teeth on their top jaw.
> ...



Something they lack I think, but here's some more info:



> NO; BIG CATS CAN ONLY PURR WHEN BREATING OUT.
> There are five species in the genus Panthera: tigers (P. tigris), snow leopards (P. uncia), leopards (P. pardus), jaguars (P. onca), and lions (P. leo).
> All Panthera cats have elastic sections on both sides of the hyoid bone, a structure which supports the tongue and its muscles.
> The elastic hyoid, combined with the fibroelastic tissue on top of the big cats' undivided vocal folds, acts like a slide trombone, enabling the big cats to roar. Only snow leopards, which lack the specialized vocal folds, are not able to roar. Because of the elastic hyoid, big cats can purr only when breathing out. The hyoid of smaller cats is solid bone. These cats can purr when breathing both in and out, but they can't roar.


----------



## Zrcalo (May 8, 2009)

Deep sea Isopods feed on dead whales and dead whales that sink into the abyssal zone are called specialized habitats called "whale falls".

Isopod---->


----------



## Zrcalo (May 8, 2009)

also, all clownfish are born males. It is only later in life that they switch gender to female.


----------



## Ozriel (May 8, 2009)

Oh...
Some cannot tell the difference when it comes to a 'gator and a Croc'.
'Gators are finger lickin' good in most southern cuisines.
Rabbits do not have pawpads.
Cape hunting Dogs have no dewclaws.


----------



## HoneyPup (May 8, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I like rodents . Mice, Rats, Beavers, Rabbits, Squirrels etc etc.


Is calling rabbits "rodents" using your imagination?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> Is calling rabbits "rodents" using your imagination?



LOL, no, for some reason i was thinking rabbits were rodents. I had a little der der moment.


----------



## Digitalpotato (May 8, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> and neither do reptiles.
> Scalies and avians shouldn't really have breasts.



Avians and gryphons expecially. Do you want a bird nursing? 


-Male Thylacines actually did have a pouch...but it was not big enough to carry things in. It was only meant to protect them from being castrated by bushes.

-The Thylacine actually could jump on its hind legs.

-Meerkats are female dominated.

-Ungulate anthros would have MUCH bigger hooves.

-Ungulate anthros would have traction problems on the floor.

-Rhinos horns are hair.

-Gryphons, while being lion-based would actually not be able to have mammaries. Why's that? Because nursing would be a PAIN!

-Dragons would not have breasts. Why? Because they are also reptilian. 

-Caracals are not lynxes.

-Female 'yenas haveeveryone's favourite organ.

-Gorillas are actually Dr. Robotnik's nightmare. 

-Anthros with webbypaws would not have any arches. Especially if they are plantigrade.


----------



## Zrcalo (May 8, 2009)

Birds dont have penis' or vaginas. they only have a single opening called a cloaca. that is where they poop, pee and have sex. 

and birds dont pee either.


----------



## Digitalpotato (May 8, 2009)

Oh yeah here's one that stands out cause it bothers me....


-No anthro can have four sets of boobs. But Pigs have eight teats? Well do you see humans with more than two breasts? Do you even see humans with four boobs period? I thought not. And why's that? Because two are painful enough for a human woman. A pig with eight basketball-sized breasts or even a dog or (heaven forbid) Reptile or bird with four boobs would constantly be going to the chiropractor to have her back adjusted. Do you know how much big boobs hurt? I've been in a neighbourhood full of girls who DON'T want bigger boobs BECAUSE one of their mothers has cantaloupe sized knockers and is in CONSTANT pain from having them.


----------



## Shadowwolf (May 8, 2009)

I thought we already figured out that we weren't talking about anthropomorphic or fictional animals here? Enough with the boobs already.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

Shadowwolf said:


> I thought we already figured out that we weren't talking about anthropomorphic or fictional animals here? Enough with the boobs already.



I like BOOBS!! >:[


----------



## Kittiara (May 8, 2009)

Amen to the OP, although honestly I can't stand it when people draw animal genitalia on anthros.  Fuckin' nasty.

Also, while being accurate is nice, being a huge nitpicker is also absurd.  Especially concerning tits, etc.  It should look like the animal, but there is really no need to flip a shit over every biological detail.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

Kittiara said:


> Amen to the OP, although honestly I can't stand it when people draw animal genitalia on anthros. Fuckin' nasty.
> 
> Also, while being accurate is nice, being a huge nitpicker is also absurd. Especially concerning tits, etc. It should look like the animal, but there is really no need to flip a shit over every biological detail.


 
Yeah I hear ya on the dog cock thing, but that's a personal thing and not suitable for the list.

As for the boobs, I've REPEATIDLY pointed out that some stuff goes with the whole 'Making the animal into the people' thing, I think three times and people keep going back to there anyway.  I mean christ, if this thread was meant to be 'nitpicky' it'd also say 'Dogs can't TALK'. @_@


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

Kittiara said:


> Amen to the OP, although honestly I can't stand it when people draw animal genitalia on anthros.  Fuckin' nasty.
> 
> Also, while being accurate is nice, being a huge nitpicker is also absurd.  Especially concerning tits, etc.  It should look like the animal, but there is really no need to flip a shit over every biological detail.



Aye, I so much prefere anthro's with human genitalia on.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

But how about we stop now before we turn this into the animal cock thread, kay? :X


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Yeah I hear ya on the dog cock thing, but that's a personal thing and not suitable for the list.
> 
> As for the boobs, I've REPEATIDLY pointed out that some stuff goes with the whole 'Making the animal into the people' thing, I think three times and people keep going back to there anyway.  I mean christ, if this thread was meant to be 'nitpicky' it'd also say 'Dogs can't TALK'. @_@



I can't draw, but either way i don't care wether the anthro is drawn correctly or not. Although i personaly don't like digitigrade hind legs.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 8, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Although i personaly don't like digitigrade hind legs.


 
Personally I don't think that any sapien species could be successful by attempting bipedal motion on a digitigrade platform, it's just flat out inefficent and would be a disadvantage, they'd become extinct or superseeded by a more suitable species.  So any furry character idea I come up with they're all plantigrade but that's personal opinion.

However that's a strictly creative point of view and that's why I didn't put it on the list.  The reason it's pointed out that multiple species are plantigrade is because numerous artists draw all their character digitigrade to be 'more animalistic' or whatever and blindly assume that that's how it works for EVERY species.  It's silly.  I think this largely stems from furry artists copying animal traits from other furry artists who made the assumption in the first place rather than looking at the entire species as a whole when drawing the character.


----------



## KitXune (May 8, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Personally I don't think that any sapien species could be successful by attempting bipedal motion on a digitigrade platform, it's just flat out inefficent and would be a disadvantage, they'd become extinct or superseeded by a more suitable species.  So any furry character idea I come up with they're all plantigrade but that's personal opinion.



It's important to remember that some bipedal plantigrades (humans among them) will lift their heels when running, effectively becoming digitigrades.

It's not seen so much among us humans these days because when we run, we usually wear running shoes, but if you run bear-foot, you'll find yourself tending to lift your heels and run on the balls of your feet and your toes.


----------



## KirbyCowFox (May 8, 2009)

Amen, my own personal add to this would be that cow udders don't drop until they begin filling with milk, basically when they're pregnant.


----------



## Kirbizard (May 8, 2009)

Zrcalo said:


> Birds dont have penis' or vaginas. they only have a single opening called a cloaca. that is where they poop, pee and have sex.


Try telling the ducks. They think they're so awesome because they have a penis-like instrument to sex about with. >:C


----------



## Digitalpotato (May 9, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I can't draw, but either way i don't care wether the anthro is drawn correctly or not. Although i personaly don't like digitigrade hind legs.




I actually kinda like plantigrade better. It seems to fit some species, especially those like otters, crocs, meerkats, and webby-pawed anthros. But hooves? Not really. I'd rather that the laws be a lot bigger than dinky little things that don't look like they can support an adult anthro.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 9, 2009)

KitXune said:


> It's important to remember that some bipedal plantigrades (humans among them) will lift their heels when running, effectively becoming digitigrades.


 
It might also be important to remember that we *suck* at running.  House cats have been clocked at speeds faster than the best human sprinters and those cats have tiny little legs.


----------



## redfoxnudetoons (May 9, 2009)

I like this list...

we need it to be updated with all the additions, though.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 9, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> It might also be important to remember that we *suck* at running.  House cats have been clocked at speeds faster than the best human sprinters and those cats have tiny little legs.



Wise old china man once say "Big is not always best"


----------



## Zseliq (May 9, 2009)

Heres one, if not already posted.

Wolf Hybrids are not super strong and huge animals with the best traits of dogs and wolves.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 9, 2009)

GummyBear said:


> Heres one, if not already posted.
> 
> Wolf Hybrids are not super strong and huge animals with the best traits of dogs and wolves.



There are if the creator wants them to be.


----------



## KitXune (May 9, 2009)

GummyBear said:


> Heres one, if not already posted.
> 
> Wolf Hybrids are not super strong and huge animals with the best traits of dogs and wolves.



That reminds me of a story some friends of mine came up with in which, when vampires and werewolves mate, the result is a super-being called a Vee-Wolf, which is so dangerous that, in order to prevent their birth, laws were passed to illegalize love between vampires and werewolves, so if any vampire and werewolf are suspected of having fallen in love, they are immediately sentanced to death.

I have such weird friends.


----------



## redfoxnudetoons (May 9, 2009)

KitXune said:


> That reminds me of a story some friends of mine came up with in which, when vampires and werewolves mate, the result is a super-being called a Vee-Wolf, which is so dangerous that, in order to prevent their birth, laws were passed to illegalize love between vampires and werewolves, so if any vampire and werewolf are suspected of having fallen in love, they are immediately sentanced to death.
> 
> I have such weird friends.



sounds like the basic theme of Underworld


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 9, 2009)

GummyBear said:


> Heres one, if not already posted.
> 
> Wolf Hybrids are not super strong and huge animals with the best traits of dogs and wolves.


 
Ontop of that, don't wolves already have all the best traits of dogs?  Well, except for that whole 'domesticated' part.  I mean dogs are meerly a subspecies of wolf afterall.


----------



## Zseliq (May 9, 2009)

RandyDarkshade said:


> There are if the creator wants them to be.


Yes that is true.




AshleyAshes said:


> Ontop of that, don't wolves already have all the best traits of dogs?  Well, except for that whole 'domesticated' part.  I mean dogs are meerly a subspecies of wolf afterall.


Depends on what you call 'best'.


----------



## NerdyMunk (May 9, 2009)

Do I have to keep mentioning, "Squirrels don't hibernate."?!


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (May 9, 2009)

ChipmunkBoy92 said:


> Do I have to keep mentioning, "Squirrels don't hibernate."?!



Absolutely correct. they don't


----------



## Cronus616 (May 10, 2009)

i like this thread


----------



## Zrcalo (May 10, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Personally I don't think that any sapien species could be successful by attempting bipedal motion on a digitigrade platform, it's just flat out inefficent and would be a disadvantage, they'd become extinct or superseeded by a more suitable species.  So any furry character idea I come up with they're all plantigrade but that's personal opinion.




D: I know I'm late on this but..

who keeps saying evolution is positive?!?! 
there are plenty of inefficient creatures out there that have flawed design platforms, but hell they're still out there!!! 
heck, amphibians dont even have a heart that separates oxygenated and deoxygenated blood!

gawd, people keep acting like nature will exterminate any species that is slightly ineffective.

ok. rant over.


----------



## Verin Asper (May 10, 2009)

Zrcalo said:


> D: I know I'm late on this but..
> 
> who keeps saying evolution is positive?!?!
> there are plenty of inefficient creatures out there that have flawed design platforms, but hell they're still out there!!!
> ...


...eventually nature will kill off humans, shes a bitch when thats gonna happen


----------



## Zrcalo (May 10, 2009)

Desume Crysis Kaiser said:


> ...eventually nature will kill off humans, shes a bitch when thats gonna happen




:/ she already is. we're doomed. DOOMED! DOOOOMMEED!


----------



## Attaman (May 10, 2009)

Desume Crysis Kaiser said:


> ...eventually nature will kill off humans, shes a bitch when thats gonna happen


  And you can bet we'll be dragging the rest of the world down with is.


----------



## DreamlessWolf (Jul 22, 2009)

Ceuper said:


> 20)


Aww. Look at the super cute flying fox! 



Rehka said:


> Quoted from someones journal I read recently:



You are correct!...or at least whoever wrote the journal is correct. Anyone who knows and/or breeds dogs knows that.

Wolves do live in packs, though I can't really argue about the hierarchy system since I don't know. Yes wolf packs are considered nuclear family units.

Wolves, dogs, house cats and large cats are digitigrade. (Do believe it was already mentioned though but if not well now ya know)

This thread was started to point out that the animal traits some people apply to their characters to make them more animalistic are incorrect if you want to be *factual.* However, if you don't want to be factual carry on...just don't try to state that whatever you write is absolute fact irl when it is not. 
It was not (correct me if I'm wrong) started to be nitpicky or bash anyone but to give *facts* about the animals if people wanted to get them correct.

*Wolves may not howl at the full moon but my siberians sure do howl every morning around 6am or so! 
(cats will annoy you with their darn yowling when in heat! grr.)

Love the thread by the way!


----------



## Robertraccoon (Jul 23, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Probably not but it wouldn't hurt for furries to crack open the wikipedia page for their fursona species or any other character they're working on.  There's actually potentially useful stuff about the species that a person might not know which could prove interesting towards characteriziation.  "Oh that's cool, I should remember that one, I had no idea."
> 
> Honestly even I assumed hyena's were canine in relation when writing something, opened up wikipdia while writing it out, learned that I was screwing up and that they are closer related to cats then but QUITE distantly.  Not that every trait has to tossed in for some absurd pursuit of 'total realistic accuracy' but there can be some good stuff you can learn.
> 
> ...




If people start using Wikipedia to learn about their animals alone you will have furries thinking elephants live in Texas and that foxes turn green when in heat.


----------



## Beta Link (Jul 23, 2009)

I smell a necro...


----------

