• mienshao@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The common peacock, also called Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus), seen in the pic above, is not endangered. Least concern in fact.

    The Green peafowl (pavo muticus) is endangered, but I highly doubt the Florida man had/ate that species. Much harder to acquire—I’ve never even seen it at a zoo.

    • Kirp123@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 hours ago

      People get tigers and lions so I don’t think a peacock is much harder to acquire. Also according to Wikipedia:

      The green peafowl is in demand for private and home aviculture and threatened by the pet trade, feather collectors and hunters for meat and targeted.

      • mienshao@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Lol just admit you got it wrong, why argue? You said peacocks are endangered, and they’re not. Just say oops and move on.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          They recognized a blind spot in their knowledge, did some learning, then reported back with what they learned. Then you yelled at them? It’s not like they were being combative.

          • village604@adultswim.fan
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            Did we read different comments?

            They posted a Wikipedia excerpt about a specific type of peafowl being endangered and said that people get other endangered animals so it wouldn’t be hard to get an endangered peacock.

            At no point did they admit a blind spot in their knowledge. In fact they doubled down on their blind spot even though they were told the peacock in the article isn’t one of the endangered ones.

        • Klear@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          Here’s the thing. You said “peacocks are endangered.” Is Green peafowl in the same genus? Yes. No one’s arguing that. As someone who is a scientist who studies peacocks, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls peacocks endangered. If you want to be “specific” like you said, then you shouldn’t either. They’re not the same thing. If you’re saying “peacocks” you’re referring to the taxonomic grouping of Pavonini, which includes things from indian peafowl to mbulus to green peafowl. So your reasoning for calling a peacocks endangered is because random people “call the ornamental birds peacocks?” Let’s get mandarin ducks in there, then, too. Also, calling someone a human or an ape? It’s not one or the other, that’s not how taxonomy works. They’re both. A green peafowl is a green peafowl and a member of the pavo genus. But that’s not what you said. You said peacocks are endangered, which is not true unless you’re okay with calling all members of the pavonini tribe endangered, which means you’d call indian peacocks, congo peafowl, and other peacocks endangered, too. Which you said you don’t. It’s okay to just admit you’re wrong, you know?