These are fun to research, and you all did so well in answering them! Out of 21 possible answers (3x7) you collectively answered 18 correctly. It's so fun to see you all show off your animal knowledge. Thanks for playing, and congratulations on your win! Anyone else reading this, go subscribe to @Ecotasia!

@@BioBush i'm already subbed! This was so much fun, and I hope you do it again

@@GeoZoo-official. Excellent choice, subscribing to Ecotasia. There are a couple of variation ideas for future episodes. This will not be the last episode of Real Animal/Fake Animal.

I totally agree. A species does not even need a different planet to be different in significant ways. Naked mole rats are like our cousins on the species family tree, and they are eusocial, poikilothermic, blind, immune to some forms of pain, etc. It makes me wonder how many senses are out there that we just don't know enough to look for. Thanks for watching, James!

Hi Harrison and Evan! I don't know how well this idea would work with other people, but it works with you two because a) you have a library of obscure animals in your heads and can search it quickly and b) your presentation experience makes it interesting to watch the two of you think and answer questions. The livestream concept is interesting, and would be a fun way to celebrate a milestone. Thank you for sharing your animal knowledge here and I hope viewers realize how much they will learn on your channel!

I think I should run the next one since I won, I have a list of some really weird animals that sound fake on paper.

@@Ecotasia I would love to do this with you as the host JJ!

Hi CoolCritters! That's awesome that you knew it. That was the single hardest one in my opinion, because it described two species. Good work, and thanks for watching!

@@BioBush That's funny, it was actually the only one I knew the species on. I hope more of these come soon!

I am fairly sure the shrimp colony in the sponge were shown in the original blue planet series on BBC

That is a really good idea! There are modern mythical animals as well. My rule for descriptions is that if you knew the animal you could pick up enough details to identify it. (So no describing the Yeti as "It lives in the mountains and eats food." ) Even famously obscure modern animals like Pokemon could get around people being familiar with the historical myths.

There are also a lot of cryptids that easily could be confused as real.

Thanks for the kind words, Joy! They all did so well in showing their animal knowledge. We had fun too. Thank you for watching!

Hi Gabe! Thank you! They all did so well. 19/21 possible correct answers between the three of them, and it was fun to hear their logic while they succeeded. Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for watching again this week!

@@BioBush you have some great participants they know a ton!

Yeah, it was interesting to have to figure this out on the spot

Glad you liked it, Vedant! It's so fun to work with these people, because they have so much knowledge and have practice articulating it. The hardest part is finding an animal that challenges them! Thank you for watching!

@@BioBush Yes !

@@BioBush and there was no chace of me not liking it !

It was a lot of fun

Hi GeoZoo! It was fun to read your thought processes. You did well, even though my descriptions blur the lines between plausible fictitious animals and implausible real animals. You also demonstrate a broad knowledge of animals. Thank you for playing along!

Thanks, Cole! This is a fun format, and it lets people with broad animal knowledge really shine. John suggested doing this as a livestream game someday so that everyone can test their knowledge. I appreciate you watching again this week!

@@BioBush Its always interesting!

But if we do a livestream we need to make the clues limericks, that would be fun

Good job Marco! You totally got 6/7. Guessing the exact animal is a bonus (good job on the kitsune) but just having a sense of "this sounds real/fake" is enough. It was fun to read through your logic on each question. Thanks for playing along with Harrison, Evan, and John!

@@BioBush btw, you didn't respond when I asked you about SCP, it's ok if you don't know/like it, I just want to know how much context I have to give

@@marcopohl4875 Sorry, I have never heard of it before. It is related to writing?

@@BioBush Yes. it's a creative writing community that started out doing horror but now does basically everything. Members all use a shared universe (although you can deviate from established canon), it's about a conspiracy theory-esque organization, that (kinda like the illuminaty) that tries to cover up the existence of supernatural things (called anomalies) to protect us normals, the group is named the SCP Foundation. I started a writing group with a few friends that are also into SCP because I just write better in a team and this way I can practice to get into writing on my own. I figured I tell you so I can more easily ask creature design questions. An example of something we can talk about now, that you have the context: we want to use Foundation Site 3 (which we made up ourselves, no previous writers worked on it before) as our main setting, and one character who works there is the Head of Research, Dr. Jon Black, who was an attempt by an unknown group to make a bird as smart as a human (smart animals are kind of a trope in SCP) so your input would be very interesting for this character. We got in contact over dragons, might make one here too. That sort of stuff.

​@@marcopohl4875 Cool! Can I say I'm glad you found this channel? I am in for theoretical creature-building. Okay, so bird brains are small and efficient. They don't have a cortex (wrinkly part) so people thought they were not smart for a long time. Like, literally incapable of higher thought, a biological instinct machine. Bird brains are organized differently. They have smaller, denser neurons (but roughly equivalent processing power per neuron). If you scaled a bird brain up to the size of a human brain it would have more mental power than a human. The big, dense brain would would run hot (not good) or slow (not good) or have some thermal diffusion assistance (sounds science horror-ish). And I bet they would be hungry. I have heard that thinking hard takes up ~20% of base metabolism in humans. Something interesting to consider from the story side is that bird intelligence is fundamentally different than human intelligence, and they will probably not recognize how smart their bird is with human intelligence tests. My favorite parrot intelligence story is from Alex the Grey. They gave him a nut on a string. The test was to see if he could coordinate foot and beak to gradually pull it up. Crows could do this. So Alex looked at the nut, looked at the researcher, and said, "Pick up nut." Was he saying he understood the goal? Was he demanding the researcher do his work for him? The intelligence shines through in breaking the experiment and achieving the results in unexpected ways. I made a video about parrot intelligence: biobush.tv/birdgeniuses and would recommend (people.eku.edu/ritchisong/birdbrain.html) for information about brain structures. All right. Questions or speculative ideas?