Neither. They are marsupials … but we don’t talk about them.
I thought they were supposed to be some kind of saber tooth koala but that wiki says marsupial lions. I’m so confused!
Nooooooooo, that’s not the best sausage. Use your imagination.
Taz is adorably incorrigible, but compared to his non-anthropomorphic namesakes he’s a wuzz. No real Tasmanian Devil is calmed by music.
Darn - I was going to ask about drop bears.
Well obviously the non-trash panda is closely related to the trash panda.
The scariest thing about real Tasmanian devils is that they don’t bleed. They’ve got a special fatty layer under their skin that seals up wounds instantly.
While I can agree with the arguments that you can call things bears even if they aren’t taxonomically related, that very much does not seem like the sort of thing Sheldon Cooper would do.
It’s not like those other examples where there isn’t another common name. The usual term in any learned place for koalas is, well, “koalas,” not “koala bears.” This is something covered in animal facts made for children, even.
I agree with the OP that Sheldon Cooper using “koala bear” is out of character. What I would expect to happen is that someone else (Penny maybe?) would say “koala bears” and Sheldon would chime in with “Actually, koalas are not taxonomically ursine and thus are not properly called bears.” (Or he might bring up their nearest common ancestor.)
It does seem likely that, like with many other nerdy things, the writers just didn’t know this. And I share the surprise given how ubiquitous said knowledge is. Heck, I’m even surprised that Jim Parsons wouldn’t have stepped in and said that Sheldon would say “koala.”
Nobody knows. No one has ever seen one and lived.
They are badass. There’s a sanctuary in Tasmania where you can see them in action. We were there when they fed half a wallaby carcass to a bunch of them. It was like watching piranhas except more vicious. They ripped the carcass to pieces in minutes. Within 15 minutes there was nothing left. Not even bone or skin. And they fight one another vociferously all the while, screeching and growling and snapping their jaws. Quite a spectacle.
Consider not doing this. It is still permissible because the pressure from the tourist trade is too much to resist. But the reality is they don’t like it at all and - based on their heart rate - they get very stressed about it. It’s quite cruel.
I’ve been to that sanctuary (my cousins live just outside Hobart.) They are scary-ass mofos. They are not big creatures, maybe the size of a smallish dog (~25 pounds), but what they lack in size they make up for in sheer unbridled aggression (or what passes for such to a casual eye.)
There are several sanctuaries in Tasmania for Devils. I’ve been to a couple. The one that I saw this at was Trowunna. Same one as you?
I went to the Tasmanian Devil Unzoo in Taranna. (Back in 1993.) Not sure if it was called that back then, but that’s the one. I think it was just Tasmanian Devil Park.
I’m sorry to hear that. I was at the Wildlife Dome in Cairns a few years ago, figured the little guy had been raised by people there. I don’t want to upset animals, no matter how cute.
Different one. But I’m sure the devils behave just the same. The big difference between now and 1993 is the outbreak of Devil facial tumor disease which is wiping out large amounts of the devil population.
It’s passed from animal to animal by direct transmission of cancerous cells from around their mouths and of course because devils fight so much, it’s easily transmitted between them.
Trowunna isn’t just a zoo. It is literally a sanctuary. They are keeping a breeding population of tumor free devils there. It is surrounded by double layer fencing designed to ensure no affected devils can get in contact with the devils in the sanctuary. The thought is that if the disease literally wipes devils out (and last I heard that was a real possibility) they would wait till there were none left outside the sanctuary then release tumor free devils to re-populate.
Yes it’s quite weird in a way. I think everyone (myself included) assumed they were fine with it, just as you did. But it seems not, at least when I last read anything about it.
They are very slow moving low energy animals. I suspect they would get stressed out by a passing butterfly.
Yes I knew that koalas were marsupials and thus not the same thing as bears. At least as far as convergent evolution and econiches go, they’re more like sloths: slow moving low energy tree dwellers.
Here is a passage from Desmond Morris’s “The Naked Ape”, I refer you to the last entry:
it was sometimes difficult to identify the animals from the names given, especially in the case of very young children. It was easy enough to decipher loins, hores, bores, penny kings, panders, tapers and leapolds, but almost impossible to be certain of the species referred to as bettle twigs, the skipping worm, the otamus, or the coco-cola beast.
Just as long as someone doesn’t try to tell me that teddy bears are not bears either, I’ll be okay!
They most certainly are. Unfortunately various ruthless imposters in the animal kingdom have attempted to steal the name.
Hate to be the one … but whilst there are phenotypic similarities the DNA evidence is conclusive that they are not ursine.
Ya gotta love The Dope.
Two diametrically opposed and incompatible views posted in the same minute.
They are related to jackalopes, oddly.