this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
92 points (89.0% liked)
science
23359 readers
1016 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I couldn't find a single example of a racist bird name in that article. You'd think they would give one.
You can find a list on https://birdnamesforbirds.wordpress.com/historical-profiles/bios-by-region/ if you're interested.
This is a terrible source, as is Lemmy tradition.
Here's a better source I really wish that op would have been better about that. It's linked in the article they linked.
It appears that they are concerned with the tradition that the first person that scientifically describes the species gets to name it.
And, well, those people have been white.
Seems like stupid rationale IMO.
Do you think artists should be able to name their works?
Why shouldn't scientists also be able to name their works?
That's exactly what I'm saying. They should be able to.
It's hard to communicate with pithy texts only. I misunderstood.
I agree that the renaming effort is an over reaction trying to be more DEI for no apparent benefit.
That's why people should be concerned. There's likely an ulterior motive here.
I'm curious what the ulterior motive for renaming birds could be?
Obviously it's about globalist world domination plot
To sell new bird guide editions, obviously.
I have no fucking idea but it only makes sense there would be one, if there truly was no bigotry behind their original names.
Calm down there Alex Jones