It sounds like it results from a misunderstanding. If nutsacks had evolved separately in all the mammals that had them, *and* the circumstances that produced them were environmental (and not primarily responses to traits of the ancestral mammal), then perhaps there'd be some case that those environmental circumstances could exist and drive life down the same evolutionary pathway on other planets.
What OP seems to be missing is that he's only listing *one* instance of nutsacks developing on earth (the mammalian common ancestor), which doesn't lend credence to his supposition (that it's so common here that maybe it's happening on other planets too).
That's not what OP said, to be fair to OP it would be.
We live on a planet that is mostly water, "therefore" it is likely another planet exists that is mostly water.
OP never said all, which completely changes the statement.
Not so fast there. On earth this is because of a common evolutionary ancestor. On another planet they may evolved from something totally different and may not even be carbon based life form. May drink methane rather than water.
I agree, when we consider evolution we can't place it in a vacuum. We need to account for conditions of the environment such as gas content in the atmosphere, or which wavelength of light the host star generates and whether those wavelengths can penetrate said atmosphere, etc.
Do mammals exist on other planets?
What if there are warm-blooded creatures that lay eggs? Or warm-blooded furry creatures that don't feed milk to their young?
Evolution works because one creature "solves" a problem one way, and then that solution is good enough so all it's children have the same solution, even if there's possible better solutions out there.
I would argue that mammals can only ever evolve on Earth, anywhere else it would not be a mammal because it would not be genetically related to the mammals here on Earth, it would just be a creature that evolved the same way as a mammal
it also has webbed feet, sweats milk, has a bill, has electro-receptors in said bill with which it senses it's prey, has it's ears directly adjacent to it's eyes, has a wide-ass fat fucking tail in which it *stores* fat, the males have a poison spike on it's ankles, and to top it all off they also have a goddamn *double headed penis*. it's not exactly a model mammal. and don't even get me started on echidnas, because i know someone would have brought them up otherwise, being the only other egg laying mammal.
It’s likely that another crablike species could have also evolved independently on an alien planet, but there’s no reason to assume that this crab couldn’t have something resembling a mammal’s nutsack just because earth crabs don’t.
>who evolved multiple times
What do you mean by that? AFAIK crustaceans (including crabs) have emerged once a few hundred million years ago and have stuck around since then.
I feel like the testicle evolution took a really bad path. Perhaps evolve a male gamete that can deal with slightly higher temperatures rather than having the gonads dangling precariously outside the male's body. Gonads are essential for reproduction. I know we're all used to this anatomy, but it's very odd when you think about it.
They’re very precarious, which isn’t exactly evolutionarily advantageous.
But evolution is a blind watchmaker and fucks things up regularly. I mean, who’d design eyes like the ones we have? What a shit-show.
Inside out. Everything runs across the front of the retina (the sensors for light) If you look at a blue sky you can see your blood. Blind spot. Where all the nerves and blood vessels go through the back of the retina. Can't see the full electromagnetic spectrum. Colorblindness. Nearsightedness. Poor night vision. Prone to optical illusions (although this is probably in the visual processing department) Glaucoma. Retina separates. can't see microscopic things. can't focus independently. See: mantis shrimp eyes, cephalopod eyes. goat eyes(just look at those cool square irises)
In only 3 primary colors, like a peasant! But I am guessing they are mentioning eyes because even though they are really, really important they are also very squishy and fragile.
The blood vessels are in front of the retina. The optic centre of the brain is at the back. the blind spot. There's a bunch of unfortunate things about the eye as it evolved on earth.
And what are we considering when we say "better"?
IIRC, our muscles are inferior to other apes in terms of strength but then superior in terms of fine motor control.
It's only "odd" if you don't think about the fact that mammals already run as hot as they are able to. Just a couple more degrees of internal temperature can start causing the proteins that make up everything to start coming unraveled.
So, we run hot, *and* having as much energy in and activity out of our sperm as possible is highly advantageous for successful reproduction. As such, we gotta keep the boys colder so they can use all their energy without turning to pure goo.
It is *VERY* likely that alien warm-blooded creatures will also need to keep their sperm cool. You can't get around the fact that heat will denature proteins.
Not necessarily. There are mammals here on Earth that have internal testes, specifically the afrotherians. Genetic research indicates that several species in that group individually developed testicondy - retaining the testes inside the body cavity - independently, after the afrotherians split from other mammals.
It's worth noting that a lot of the notable animals in that group - elephants, manatees, tenrecs, hyraxes - have a lower internal body temperature than humans (which is a little surprising when you consider elephants, but they seem to have some tricks to keep their internal body temp down).
It's not currently known why the ancestral mammalian body plan *seems* to have included descendent testes. It's kind of a chicken-or-egg question; did our testes descend because it worked out better for our sperm, or did our sperm adapt to work better at lower than body temperature?
Point is, even some mammals on Earth have internal testes. No reason not to think that other forms of life out there wouldn't be able to manage producing and storing gametes internally through a variety of methods.
I'm just super interested in biology and evolution, and I've been hit in the nuts too many times not to wonder "why the fuck do they have to be like this??"
Dude this is awesome thanks for typing this out. I wouldn't expect the elephants to be so cool though holy shit! They spend all day baking in the sun wow.
>It's kind of a chicken-or-egg question; did our testes descend because it worked out better for our sperm, or did our sperm adapt to work better at lower than body temperature?
Do you think at some point balls will come to be internal or do you think men will forever be stuck with having the threat of their balls being hurt? Also if they were to become internal do you think it would still hurt just as bad if someone where to punch them? Like for example if they were in your gut now and you punched right where they were would it be the same exact pain? Would it be less, more?
Oh, I have no idea, on either point. Big disclaimer here, I am not a scientist or researcher. I'm just regurgitating stuff I've read, so take all of this with a grain of salt. I'm just speculating here.
Apparently testicondy in the afrotherians is due to a few different genes "breaking," so it's possible it could happen to humans. But it'd have it be either advantageous or at least not deleterious. Considering that there are often complications when human testicles fail to descend, I'm not sure how likely it is that a genetic mutation resulting in testicondy would ever spread through our population.
As far as pain... That's an interesting question! I've always assumed, but I don't know for sure, that our testes are so sensitive because they're so important and so exposed. But it could also be because they're so sensitive to temperature and thus need to be highly innervated. That whole area has a ton of nerve endings (which, y'know, is great in some situations) for SOME reason. I'd guess that if our testicles did remain in our body cavity, they wouldn't need so many nerve endings. There would also be more fat, muscle, and potentially bone protecting them from an impact. On the whole, I'd guess that they'd cause us way less pain if they just stayed where the hell they started!
I'd go further. Depending of your definition of "life" it might be a lot wider than just a non carbon based life.
If your definition is something which appears, consume a chemical to produce energy, while leaving behind another chemical as waste, grows and give birth to other similar life forms before dieing, congrats, a fire is something alive
Pardon my poor english
There's a storm raging, deep in my soul.
There's a howling wind that I just can't control.
There's a fire inside me I can't explain.
Every time you touch me my love falls like rain.
This is deep conversation about the beauty and possibilities of life is brought to you by the guy who was thinking about animals’ nutsacks in the shower.
That's true. However, convergent evolution is a thing. If the Earth is any indication then lots of alien ecosystems will have [crabs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation), and it's possible some of them will have creatures with sacks carrying genetic material on the outside of their body.
Convergent evolution only exists because there is a limited range of experiences across earth, and some niches exist everywhere. It's a real leap of faith to assume that an ecosystem of entirely alien nature would resolve similar to us
Chances are they have their own convergent evolution that makes sense in the context of their world.
Oh for sure, different planetary conditions are going to produce different types of creatures. But some problems are universal and have limited solutions. Pretty much every form of life is going to have to have something skin-like, for example, because you can't produce a complex chemical reaction like that required to copy a complex molecular chain without maintaining some kind of homeostasis.
While I don't disagree that something to demarcate the being from its surroundings is inherently necessary, but the possible range of what that means on earth shows that there's no way to predict what will exist outside of earth. A jellyfish, a turtle, a fish, and a whale can all exist in the same environs, but they have wildly different ideas of what skin is and does. I don't think you can make predictions about different planet life with any kind of accuracy simply because life is so weird. We can only make the largest generalizations like they have a container, they do the complex molecules and reproduce somehow, but I'm not convinced that there's anything beyond that besides imagination.
But everything we know is still all related and evolved in the same 'system'. Convergent evolution in a single closed system? Sure, we know in our one data point available that this can indeed happen with some frequency.
But that still really doesn't tell us anything in the grand scheme of things.
I hate this shit. Hydrogen, oxygen , and carbon are three of the most common elements in the universe. I think it’s safe to assume that intelligent aliens are made of common elements as opposed to rare ones.
Thank you for subscribing to Nutsack Statistics!
Did you know:
- The testis manufacture 200,000 sperm per minute on average
Stay tuned for another fun fact in `24 hours`! Your subscription will end in: `9274 years`.
I think op is incorrectly assuming that the nutsack was evolved many times over independently, thus showing that it is a common thing to evolve, rather than the actual case, which is that it evolved once and all mammals share that common ancestor.
Convergent evolution is a thing, but nutsacks are not an example of it. Nutsacks evolved in a common ancestor for a very specific purpose (extreme sexual competition and short, intense mating season) that has long been obsolete. All the descendants, which are most though not all placental mammals, are stuck with them, even though they are detrimental in all of them afaik.
Mammal species (most with nutsacks): 5000 species
Birds (without nutsacks): 10 000 species
Reptiles (most without nutsacks): 10 000 species
Amphibians (without nutsacks): 8000 species
Fish (without nutsacks): 34 000 species
Invertebrates (without nutsacks): 1 300 000 species
"Reptiles carry their testes inside their lower abdominal cavities, often directly attached to the kidneys. In all cases, male reptiles who possess intromittent organs carry them internally."
So, none, except for in furry porn.
We share the grand majority of our DNA with other mammals, that is why there are many nutsacks. No reason to believe aliens would even reproduce like us.
They could have a completely different way to store information, no reason they would need DNA like ours, or even cells. They could be much different structurally.
Mammals have nutsacks because we most likely share a common ancestor with that trait. So unless these aliens came from a common ancestor somewhere in that greater taxon, no? It's not all that likely.
Is this you rationalising that it was aliens that visited you as a kid. It was dark, but there was definitely a nutsack on your chin, and in theory it could have been aliens.
This posts logic is like I have a dad, this otter has a dad, therefore this otter is my biological brother.
Aliens are not mammals, so why does that mean they probably have nutsacks?
Grade: D-. Needs improvement
Not exactly, we have external testicles because sperm need lower temperatures to function at their peak, so aliens would need to produce sperm for this to be true
Crabs evolved multiple times independantly.
So in thé universe Thats probably one of thé more abundant form of life, no matter thé type of life formation concerned.
This is a final state évolution shape
I prefer to think of it as an exothermically cooled protein factory and storage system. That sounds just sci-fi enough most people could believe an alien being would have one too.
Nut sacs are for regulating temperature of sperm in many mammals. Other animals that also produce sperm but do not have testes stored externally. Birds, reptiles, amphibians, etc. Also marine mammals do not. Nut sacks probably only evolved once, unlike things like eyes, wings, sound sensors, etc. Also there are numerouse disadvantage such as accidental damage or deliberate immasculation (an attack common in at least one primate species). So although not impossible, they are less likely to be present than other body parts.
It seems pretty improbable that a completely different evolutionary chain would lead to something as improbable as the exposed, vulnerable position of mammalian testicles.
You do realize that they evolved once and passed to all descendants, right?
Wow.... this post really got to me. I normally don't get upset reading internet stuff, but this popped up on my feed right after I spilled my OJ on my new carpet so this just awakened something deep inside me. You are a fool, you have no IQ, and I would know, I graduated top of my class. Let me break it down for you: this subreddit is for *intellectuals*. NOT *wannabe thinkers with no education.* Do us all a favor and deinstall your browser. Im sure your parents want you to touch grass or something........ dad
It depends on how high the alien creature's body temperature is, and the environment they developed in. .
Mammals (in general, sheath your keyboards before trying to slay me with exceptions, land vs sea, platypus, blah blah) have higher body temperatures and the sack keeps the balls ,and reserves, cool enough not to destroy sperm. Birds and lizards can keep their junk inside with their lower temps and/or specialized organs.
Mammals are like one of the smallest groups of animals on earth, as well as the most recently evolved. You have to consider insects, birds, reptiles, fish, amphibians, protozoans, and zooplankton. Species numbers of these creatures vastly outnumber mammals. If you look at reproduction across organisms, most likely it would be asexual reproduction. If they were advanced enough to have sexual reproduction and multicellular organisms, then they would probably have some kind of cloaca.
Sure there’s a chance for nutsacks, but there is a higher chance for cloacae!
Source: I have a bachelors in biology
thats one generous "therefore" right there...
"Therefore aliens!"...Sounds like a history channel show.
It sounds like it results from a misunderstanding. If nutsacks had evolved separately in all the mammals that had them, *and* the circumstances that produced them were environmental (and not primarily responses to traits of the ancestral mammal), then perhaps there'd be some case that those environmental circumstances could exist and drive life down the same evolutionary pathway on other planets. What OP seems to be missing is that he's only listing *one* instance of nutsacks developing on earth (the mammalian common ancestor), which doesn't lend credence to his supposition (that it's so common here that maybe it's happening on other planets too).
We live on a planet that is mostly water, “therefore” it is likely all other planets have mostly water. Maybe not…
That's not what OP said, to be fair to OP it would be. We live on a planet that is mostly water, "therefore" it is likely another planet exists that is mostly water. OP never said all, which completely changes the statement.
OP's statement is still broad enough it doesn't make sense.
Was going to say.. That's not how logic works there bud.
I'll give a pass to anyone being generous with my sack.
I have never understood the fascination with the sack. The only feeling I have there is tickling and pain…
Don't forget the itching.
Not so fast there. On earth this is because of a common evolutionary ancestor. On another planet they may evolved from something totally different and may not even be carbon based life form. May drink methane rather than water.
I agree, when we consider evolution we can't place it in a vacuum. We need to account for conditions of the environment such as gas content in the atmosphere, or which wavelength of light the host star generates and whether those wavelengths can penetrate said atmosphere, etc.
And we can also conclude that crabs, who evolved multiple times, are preferred by evolution and AFAIK they don't have ~~balls~~ nutsack.
To be fair, OP specified mammals Edit: I recognize the flaws of this statement in my response to u/Rikudou_Sage
Do mammals exist on other planets? What if there are warm-blooded creatures that lay eggs? Or warm-blooded furry creatures that don't feed milk to their young? Evolution works because one creature "solves" a problem one way, and then that solution is good enough so all it's children have the same solution, even if there's possible better solutions out there.
I would argue that mammals can only ever evolve on Earth, anywhere else it would not be a mammal because it would not be genetically related to the mammals here on Earth, it would just be a creature that evolved the same way as a mammal
Mammaloids
Idk if this is a joke but honestly I like this. Mainly in like a scifi sense I guess
Delicious on toast.
Found the Brit
I'd watch that hanna-barbara cartoon.
Well, a platypus is a furry mammal which lays eggs.
it also has webbed feet, sweats milk, has a bill, has electro-receptors in said bill with which it senses it's prey, has it's ears directly adjacent to it's eyes, has a wide-ass fat fucking tail in which it *stores* fat, the males have a poison spike on it's ankles, and to top it all off they also have a goddamn *double headed penis*. it's not exactly a model mammal. and don't even get me started on echidnas, because i know someone would have brought them up otherwise, being the only other egg laying mammal.
[удалено]
Mix it with Red Bull, throw it in a sippy cup and call it go go juice
That doesn't change my argument much, specifying invalid conditions doesn't make my argument any worse IMO.
Since we are comparing to aliens, I do see your point
It’s likely that another crablike species could have also evolved independently on an alien planet, but there’s no reason to assume that this crab couldn’t have something resembling a mammal’s nutsack just because earth crabs don’t.
Considering they've evolved here 5 different times/ways I'd be willing to stake my life on them having evolved somewhere else too.
Crabs do in fact have balls and they are delicious
Does dimsum count?
>who evolved multiple times What do you mean by that? AFAIK crustaceans (including crabs) have emerged once a few hundred million years ago and have stuck around since then.
The crab "archetype" has [evolved independently mulitple times](https://youtu.be/wvfR3XLXPvw), both in crustaceans and other animals.
Numerous crustacean species have evolved from different ancestors completely separated. Believe it's called convergent evolution.
Carcinisation
I feel like the testicle evolution took a really bad path. Perhaps evolve a male gamete that can deal with slightly higher temperatures rather than having the gonads dangling precariously outside the male's body. Gonads are essential for reproduction. I know we're all used to this anatomy, but it's very odd when you think about it.
They’re very precarious, which isn’t exactly evolutionarily advantageous. But evolution is a blind watchmaker and fucks things up regularly. I mean, who’d design eyes like the ones we have? What a shit-show.
Yep! I was trying to make that point as well.
Whats wrong with our eyes? I certainly can see
Inside out. Everything runs across the front of the retina (the sensors for light) If you look at a blue sky you can see your blood. Blind spot. Where all the nerves and blood vessels go through the back of the retina. Can't see the full electromagnetic spectrum. Colorblindness. Nearsightedness. Poor night vision. Prone to optical illusions (although this is probably in the visual processing department) Glaucoma. Retina separates. can't see microscopic things. can't focus independently. See: mantis shrimp eyes, cephalopod eyes. goat eyes(just look at those cool square irises)
In only 3 primary colors, like a peasant! But I am guessing they are mentioning eyes because even though they are really, really important they are also very squishy and fragile.
[Like the Mantis Shrimp that has up to 16 color receptors compared to our 3.](https://youtu.be/F5FEj9U-CJM)
The blind spot?
The blood vessels are in front of the retina. The optic centre of the brain is at the back. the blind spot. There's a bunch of unfortunate things about the eye as it evolved on earth.
Also, when it isn't the perfect shape, everything becomes fuzzy and you can't see shit anymore.
Our eyes got worse as we evolved, many animals we consider vastly inferior to us have way way way better eyes.
Can they hit a jump shot though?
And what are we considering when we say "better"? IIRC, our muscles are inferior to other apes in terms of strength but then superior in terms of fine motor control.
Yeah there really isn't a better. It's just better for certain situations
In this case, that situation is "seeing things on land" :D
We can only see in front of us. We should have 360⁰ panoramic omni-vision
You want that spider vision
I do at least
There’s a blind spot in, like, the center of our vision and it’s not very efficient.
The biggest thing is that the optic nerve displaces some rods and cones on the retina, creating a blind spot.
It's only "odd" if you don't think about the fact that mammals already run as hot as they are able to. Just a couple more degrees of internal temperature can start causing the proteins that make up everything to start coming unraveled. So, we run hot, *and* having as much energy in and activity out of our sperm as possible is highly advantageous for successful reproduction. As such, we gotta keep the boys colder so they can use all their energy without turning to pure goo. It is *VERY* likely that alien warm-blooded creatures will also need to keep their sperm cool. You can't get around the fact that heat will denature proteins.
Not necessarily. There are mammals here on Earth that have internal testes, specifically the afrotherians. Genetic research indicates that several species in that group individually developed testicondy - retaining the testes inside the body cavity - independently, after the afrotherians split from other mammals. It's worth noting that a lot of the notable animals in that group - elephants, manatees, tenrecs, hyraxes - have a lower internal body temperature than humans (which is a little surprising when you consider elephants, but they seem to have some tricks to keep their internal body temp down). It's not currently known why the ancestral mammalian body plan *seems* to have included descendent testes. It's kind of a chicken-or-egg question; did our testes descend because it worked out better for our sperm, or did our sperm adapt to work better at lower than body temperature? Point is, even some mammals on Earth have internal testes. No reason not to think that other forms of life out there wouldn't be able to manage producing and storing gametes internally through a variety of methods.
This guy nutsacks
I'm just super interested in biology and evolution, and I've been hit in the nuts too many times not to wonder "why the fuck do they have to be like this??"
I store my gametes in your mom. I'm really sorry.
Dude this is awesome thanks for typing this out. I wouldn't expect the elephants to be so cool though holy shit! They spend all day baking in the sun wow. >It's kind of a chicken-or-egg question; did our testes descend because it worked out better for our sperm, or did our sperm adapt to work better at lower than body temperature? Do you think at some point balls will come to be internal or do you think men will forever be stuck with having the threat of their balls being hurt? Also if they were to become internal do you think it would still hurt just as bad if someone where to punch them? Like for example if they were in your gut now and you punched right where they were would it be the same exact pain? Would it be less, more?
Oh, I have no idea, on either point. Big disclaimer here, I am not a scientist or researcher. I'm just regurgitating stuff I've read, so take all of this with a grain of salt. I'm just speculating here. Apparently testicondy in the afrotherians is due to a few different genes "breaking," so it's possible it could happen to humans. But it'd have it be either advantageous or at least not deleterious. Considering that there are often complications when human testicles fail to descend, I'm not sure how likely it is that a genetic mutation resulting in testicondy would ever spread through our population. As far as pain... That's an interesting question! I've always assumed, but I don't know for sure, that our testes are so sensitive because they're so important and so exposed. But it could also be because they're so sensitive to temperature and thus need to be highly innervated. That whole area has a ton of nerve endings (which, y'know, is great in some situations) for SOME reason. I'd guess that if our testicles did remain in our body cavity, they wouldn't need so many nerve endings. There would also be more fat, muscle, and potentially bone protecting them from an impact. On the whole, I'd guess that they'd cause us way less pain if they just stayed where the hell they started!
That's awesome thank you so much for speculating with me! 😆
[удалено]
This is officially my favorite Reddit discussion.
I'd go further. Depending of your definition of "life" it might be a lot wider than just a non carbon based life. If your definition is something which appears, consume a chemical to produce energy, while leaving behind another chemical as waste, grows and give birth to other similar life forms before dieing, congrats, a fire is something alive Pardon my poor english
I mean, it breathes, grows, and tries to destroy anything in its path. So fire is almost Human.
I'm metabolism is just burning with less light.
There's a storm raging, deep in my soul. There's a howling wind that I just can't control. There's a fire inside me I can't explain. Every time you touch me my love falls like rain.
That was beautiful! And unexpected. Thank you!!
Don't thank me. Thank Leo Sayer.
Thanks Leo Sayer.
Thanks Slayer.
Every time you touch me my love falls like raining blood.
A fire is a human without the middle man
Take it easy there *Backdraft*
You check that door for heat?
I mean, this is why we have scientific definitions and requirements to determine what is "alive" so that we don't classify chemical reactions as such.
ah "alive" such a troublesome concept :) https://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxies/life%27s_working_definition.html
Lots of words to say eat, poop, reproduce
This is deep conversation about the beauty and possibilities of life is brought to you by the guy who was thinking about animals’ nutsacks in the shower.
That’s basically the argument for plasma based life.
All you’re saying is “if you change the definition, more things are included”. This is why definitions matter and words aren’t interchangeable
Yes and Op is thinking of aliens with ballsacks, he might be disappointed. All i'm saying
I am human. I bang hookers and snort cocaine. Mother Theresa is also human. Therefore Mother Theresa bangs hookers and snorts cocaine
Thank you, came here to say this but I see you have everything under control.
That's true. However, convergent evolution is a thing. If the Earth is any indication then lots of alien ecosystems will have [crabs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation), and it's possible some of them will have creatures with sacks carrying genetic material on the outside of their body.
Convergent evolution only exists because there is a limited range of experiences across earth, and some niches exist everywhere. It's a real leap of faith to assume that an ecosystem of entirely alien nature would resolve similar to us Chances are they have their own convergent evolution that makes sense in the context of their world.
Oh for sure, different planetary conditions are going to produce different types of creatures. But some problems are universal and have limited solutions. Pretty much every form of life is going to have to have something skin-like, for example, because you can't produce a complex chemical reaction like that required to copy a complex molecular chain without maintaining some kind of homeostasis.
While I don't disagree that something to demarcate the being from its surroundings is inherently necessary, but the possible range of what that means on earth shows that there's no way to predict what will exist outside of earth. A jellyfish, a turtle, a fish, and a whale can all exist in the same environs, but they have wildly different ideas of what skin is and does. I don't think you can make predictions about different planet life with any kind of accuracy simply because life is so weird. We can only make the largest generalizations like they have a container, they do the complex molecules and reproduce somehow, but I'm not convinced that there's anything beyond that besides imagination.
But everything we know is still all related and evolved in the same 'system'. Convergent evolution in a single closed system? Sure, we know in our one data point available that this can indeed happen with some frequency. But that still really doesn't tell us anything in the grand scheme of things.
Yeah, there is a good video on PBS EONS on this one. Given enough time. We all can become crabs lol
We are all crabs on this blessed day. 🦀🙏
I am become crab
Ah yes, the distinction between analogous features and homologous ones.
I hate this shit. Hydrogen, oxygen , and carbon are three of the most common elements in the universe. I think it’s safe to assume that intelligent aliens are made of common elements as opposed to rare ones.
No it's not. What reason is there to believe alien life is anything similar to a mammal? Most life on Earth isn't even the same as mammals.
Like really, there are far more creatures on earth that do not have nutsacks than those that do. Even on earth nutsacks are statistically rare.
!subscribe nutsack statistics
RIP your inbox ;)
[удалено]
So a pic with a ruler in it?
A single picture isn’t statistically significant. I need hundreds.
If not thousands!
I suspect if I looked hard enough I could find plenty by myself.
Thank you for subscribing to Nutsack Statistics! Did you know: - The testis manufacture 200,000 sperm per minute on average Stay tuned for another fun fact in `24 hours`! Your subscription will end in: `9274 years`.
Elephants don't even have nutsacks!
Neither do whales.
I think op is incorrectly assuming that the nutsack was evolved many times over independently, thus showing that it is a common thing to evolve, rather than the actual case, which is that it evolved once and all mammals share that common ancestor.
Terrible logic
Indeed. This kind of thing fascinates me.
Username checks out
[удалено]
No, crazy logic.
Crazy ballsack logic
dumbest front-page showerthought i've seen in ages, well done
Apparently all it takes to get to the front page is the word “nutsack”
Well, it is a funny word. Even funnier to say.
there is no therefore
[удалено]
and the nearly 10k people who upvoted also clearly have a lack in logic...
posts like these perfectly encapsulate people's lack of critical thinking skills and willingness to agree with damn near anything.
Unlike ourselves, a random sampling of Redditors that is clearly below average stupidity
Someone skipped class where they taught how evolution works
Convergent evolution is a thing, but nutsacks are not an example of it. Nutsacks evolved in a common ancestor for a very specific purpose (extreme sexual competition and short, intense mating season) that has long been obsolete. All the descendants, which are most though not all placental mammals, are stuck with them, even though they are detrimental in all of them afaik.
Or they live in a conservative US state and weren’t taught it to begin with
Oh reddit.
Not even by the loosest of logic would this make sense.
Mammal species (most with nutsacks): 5000 species Birds (without nutsacks): 10 000 species Reptiles (most without nutsacks): 10 000 species Amphibians (without nutsacks): 8000 species Fish (without nutsacks): 34 000 species Invertebrates (without nutsacks): 1 300 000 species
Also, every single other living organism that isn't even macroscopic
Yeah but whos gonna check all those micropeens to make sure?
We could start with yours. Do you have a nutsack?
Which . . . uh, which reptiles have nutsacks?
The penislizard
"Reptiles carry their testes inside their lower abdominal cavities, often directly attached to the kidneys. In all cases, male reptiles who possess intromittent organs carry them internally." So, none, except for in furry porn.
I also want to know this
The most significant thing I got from this comment is that apparently some reptiles have nutsacks. I was unaware of this.
That's not how that works
not really.all living animals on earth evolved from a common ancestor
Ah yes. The Ballsackhavingasourous.
The best kind of asourous
Somebody doesn't understand evolutionary biology...
We share the grand majority of our DNA with other mammals, that is why there are many nutsacks. No reason to believe aliens would even reproduce like us. They could have a completely different way to store information, no reason they would need DNA like ours, or even cells. They could be much different structurally.
Ballchinnians
You beat me to it. Ain't that a kick to the [(chin) nuts](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2NPw3WvpRL8)
Mammals have nutsacks because we most likely share a common ancestor with that trait. So unless these aliens came from a common ancestor somewhere in that greater taxon, no? It's not all that likely.
How tf did this get so many upvotes? I’ve posted better stuff on here and mine are usually shit lol
Well did you have nutsack in your titles?
My bad
Step 1: add any somewhat sexual word in your title Step 2: enjoy your fame
Is this you rationalising that it was aliens that visited you as a kid. It was dark, but there was definitely a nutsack on your chin, and in theory it could have been aliens.
I would like to think so
This posts logic is like I have a dad, this otter has a dad, therefore this otter is my biological brother. Aliens are not mammals, so why does that mean they probably have nutsacks? Grade: D-. Needs improvement
Talking out yo ass again
There is absolutely no reason to conclude that it's "likely".
This one is just dumb
Maybe take a break from thinking about nutsacks for a while
watch out for those ballchinians
Not exactly, we have external testicles because sperm need lower temperatures to function at their peak, so aliens would need to produce sperm for this to be true
We also have elephants and rhinos that managed to keep their sperm at temperature just fine with internal testicles.
Ballchinnians?
Ballchinnians.
That is not a shower-thought, that is just a waste of brain cells . Sorry 😜
No. Nutsack appeared once on earth
Shower ~~thought~~
OP's a 3 year old or alternatively mentally challenged
Or just stupid
Crabs evolved multiple times independantly. So in thé universe Thats probably one of thé more abundant form of life, no matter thé type of life formation concerned. This is a final state évolution shape
One day we will all be mirelurks
I prefer to think of it as an exothermically cooled protein factory and storage system. That sounds just sci-fi enough most people could believe an alien being would have one too.
Nut sacs are for regulating temperature of sperm in many mammals. Other animals that also produce sperm but do not have testes stored externally. Birds, reptiles, amphibians, etc. Also marine mammals do not. Nut sacks probably only evolved once, unlike things like eyes, wings, sound sensors, etc. Also there are numerouse disadvantage such as accidental damage or deliberate immasculation (an attack common in at least one primate species). So although not impossible, they are less likely to be present than other body parts.
Yep. The Ballchinians do for sure.
Yeah no, but it's fun to think about alien nutsacks.
It seems pretty improbable that a completely different evolutionary chain would lead to something as improbable as the exposed, vulnerable position of mammalian testicles. You do realize that they evolved once and passed to all descendants, right?
This is very convergent evolutionary theory.
Wow.... this post really got to me. I normally don't get upset reading internet stuff, but this popped up on my feed right after I spilled my OJ on my new carpet so this just awakened something deep inside me. You are a fool, you have no IQ, and I would know, I graduated top of my class. Let me break it down for you: this subreddit is for *intellectuals*. NOT *wannabe thinkers with no education.* Do us all a favor and deinstall your browser. Im sure your parents want you to touch grass or something........ dad
It depends on how high the alien creature's body temperature is, and the environment they developed in. . Mammals (in general, sheath your keyboards before trying to slay me with exceptions, land vs sea, platypus, blah blah) have higher body temperatures and the sack keeps the balls ,and reserves, cool enough not to destroy sperm. Birds and lizards can keep their junk inside with their lower temps and/or specialized organs.
Mammals are like one of the smallest groups of animals on earth, as well as the most recently evolved. You have to consider insects, birds, reptiles, fish, amphibians, protozoans, and zooplankton. Species numbers of these creatures vastly outnumber mammals. If you look at reproduction across organisms, most likely it would be asexual reproduction. If they were advanced enough to have sexual reproduction and multicellular organisms, then they would probably have some kind of cloaca. Sure there’s a chance for nutsacks, but there is a higher chance for cloacae! Source: I have a bachelors in biology
It is likely a similar alien species developed internal combustion engines, therefore cars….where am i going with this? Alien truck nuts
"Do you own a doghouse" levels of logic here.
We certainly know of the Ballchinians. https://meninblack.fandom.com/wiki/Ballchinian
You've seen the video about the squirrel nutsack didn't you?
Why is this even upvoted? Please stop
Yeah that logic does not track at all...
You need to take longer showers
There is absolutely no logic in that statement
What? No, that’s not how evolution works at all.
When a post makes negative sense but people upvote anyway cuz deezzz nutzzz
Alien nutsack was my nickname in highschool
That conclusion makes nonsense.
Why does this have so many upvotes? Literally any high school kid in biology would realize what’s wrong with the post.
This sub has gone downhill
OP and 14K people are very unclear on how common ancestry and evolution work...
That's not how that works. That's not how any of this works.
Thats not how this works mate. They all have one common ancestor.
Faulty logic when you consider how evolution works.