What if you take off the costume? Humans aren’t entirely bilaterally symmetrical (at least not on the inside) and obviously not radially symmetrical so the paradox continues.
Flounders are not bilaterally symmetrical.
He can’t understand you, dude.
Hey,
Flounder!
You’
re no
t bila
terall
y sym
metri
cal!
In the tree of life, flounders are a sub-sub-…-sub-species of bilaterally symmetrical animals: https://www.onezoom.org/life/@Holozoa=5246131?otthome=%40_ozid%3D1&highlight=path%3A%40Apionichthys_finis%3D3640785&highlight=path%3A%40Bilateria%3D117569#x2913,y-2310,w8.2796
Edit: let me preemptively be a pedant to myself and say that “sub-…-species” is wrong because “bilaterally symmetrical animals” is not a species. Flounder is itself a species AFAIK, not a sub-species of anything. It is a descendant of the common ancestor of all bilaterally symmetrical animals. There, now surely no one will find anything to be pedantic about :D
I appreciate that information. However, flounders themselves are not bilaterally symmetrical. I have caught many dozens of them and it’s pretty easy to tell that they are not.
Flounders are born symmetrical; eye migration happens as they transition to the juvenile stage of growth.
TIL sponges don’t do punctuation.
What about phylum neutral bathrooms?
Echinoderms:
