• AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Perhaps not, but I’d not give it equal prominance in a news report or a movie adaptation if it was next to a living one, and I wouldn’t do anything else silly like claim a billion aliens had been found because it had gut flora.

    • J92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Equal prominence is a bit of a side step, and i never mentioned a living one next to it.

      Also I’m fairly sure any biologist would be claiming each distinct species found within the alien as being new discoveries also.

      • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        If it’s a side step, then so was your question. You took away the one obviously-much-more-alive-and-capable-of-interacting-with-the-plot alien. This is a semantic argument, and you’re using a different sense of the word than the titles of the films were using, so it’s not even a valid semantic argument. A reasonable person wouldn’t expect to be able to drive a herse in a carpool lane just because there was an occupied coffin in the back and a sign said vehicles could only use the lane if they contained two people because they’d have to use a definition of person other than the one the sign obviously meant, just like how they couldn’t claim that the sign was talking about a nearby swimming pool or running track and therefore irrelevant to drivers because lanes separate competitors in races.

        • J92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yours is a side step because saying equal prominence has nothing to do with whether something a corpse of an alien is an alien.

          I just made up separate example to focus on that aspect. But it will clearly be quicker if I just say you’re right. Have a nice day.