Do whales have nipples?

Hmm, tricky:

Do whales have nipples? Why discussing evolution in schools can occasionally be tricky

Actually not so tricky, given that they suckle their calves.

12 thoughts on “Do whales have nipples?”

  1. According to the Bible insects have four legs and bats are birds so I’m not sure that it is a reliable source of information on biology.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    At least one of the monotremes produce milk but have no nipples. Actually I would say it might be all of them but there are only two so it is bound to be wrong.

    Milk is modified sweat and I think they have a modified sweat gland that leaks milk onto the fur where it is lapped up by the young.

  3. There’s a branch of zoology about Dianne Abbotts?

    The abbottopotamus roams the sewers of Westminster.

  4. Ah the complete quote is : “Evolution is not a fact. That’s why it’s called a theory! There’s more evidence that the Bible is true!”

    The bible thing is the clincher here, and shows she shouldn’t be allowed within a mile of young impressionable minds.
    I can sort of understand how a liberal arts major could confuse the vernacular use of “theory” with the academic definition. “Oh, the Humanities” /Sheldon , and all..
    But bringing the Book in turns what could be a slight disqualifier for the task of teaching Stuff to young, impressionable minds into a fullblown Fuck You.

    It’s “christian” fanaticism on the same level as the much-more-notorious muslim ( and no doubt the other major religions have their hardline nutcases as well..) variety, and should be treated the same: Fire their sorry asses, and revoke their licence to teach. Period.

  5. So Much For Subtlety

    Grikath – “It’s “christian” fanaticism on the same level as the much-more-notorious muslim ( and no doubt the other major religions have their hardline nutcases as well..) variety, and should be treated the same: Fire their sorry asses, and revoke their licence to teach. Period.”

    B0ll0cks. Christians, even fundamentalist Christians, are utterly harmless. More than that, they make the societies in which they live much better. There is no comparison with the Muslims at all. Would a Christian teacher hurt the life chances of small children? Unlikely. She is likely to make their lives better.

    And what is the alternative? Marxists? Great. That is going to work out really well.

    It would still be stupid, but better to fire all the non-Christian teachers and replace them with Born Agains.

  6. “B0ll0cks. Christians, even fundamentalist Christians, are utterly harmless.”

    Sorry to pause you there, but shall we start by trotting out the Black Swans here, before you dig yourself any deeper?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *