this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
1001 points (99.5% liked)

Science Memes

15013 readers
1927 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 75 points 1 month ago (42 children)

So if I understand you correctly, if I remove my lungs, I’m a bee? My aunt had lung cancer, so they’ll probably kill me, anyway. I’ll report back on the results.

[–] tahoe@lemmy.world 83 points 1 month ago (22 children)

No because you’re likely too big (no offense) :(

I think insects have little holes all over their bodies, in which air gets inside by itself through some physics shenanigans. It doesn’t need to be actively sucked in like with lungs, it just happens because they’re so small.

This method doesn’t scale up though since if you’re bigger, you need more air, and having little holes all over your body won’t cut it. Thats when you know you need lungs, and that’s why you don’t see insects the size of a dog these days (thankfully).

There used to be times in the Earth’s history (Carboniferous) where the air’s composition was different though, and since it had more oxygen in it, insects could grow a lot larger.

[–] wisely@feddit.org 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So theoretically if we terraformed the Earth we would be free to genetically engineer humans to survive without lungs?

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They wouldn't be human. So much of us is built around our lungs, including our ability to speak that anything adapted to survive without them would be as different from a human as a human is from other lung-less animals. Even if they were more intelligent, they would not look or act remotely like a human.

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Okay, first of all, how dare you bring evidence and reason into this.

On a more serious note, I agree with the position mentioned in the second paragraph that transhumanism results in a posthuman being, that is, a species that is not human.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Human is such a flaky word, and species isn't much better. I'd bet there could be a situation in which they can successfully interbreed with relatively modern humans and still produce viable offspring, so still the same species. Human doesn't even require homo sapiens though. It can include other species that have the traits of humans.

[–] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

You're not wrong. One group will displace the other, though. Some of us Homo Sapiens still have genes from Homo Neanderthalensis. Neanderthals aren't around anymore, though. Also, archeological evidence suggests they didn't spend much time together.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (39 replies)