> I've found a few octopodes (allegedly, the correct plural of "octopus")
> pages that might get all of us up to speed on this issue. These are:
The following is assuming that current scientific
usage is consistent with Latin, rather than merely based on it...
which is quite an assumption...
The plural of "octopus" is "octopi".
"Octopodes" is the proper plural of "octopod" which means "eight
feet" (in terms of appendages, not distance). An octopus is indeed
an octopod. So is a squid, or a crab, or a lobster, or a spider, or
a daddy-long-legs (which isn't a spider), or a scorpion if I remember
right. Among others.
Of all these, I think that octopi are the only short-term viable
candidates for uplift, and at least in the case of the Pacific giant,
may already be uplifted without human intervention.
By the way, I've heard it plausibly suggested that octopi don't
really need to be constantly immersed in water to do well. They do
require high humidity, and they do require near-neutral bouyancy with
regard to the space around them. And gills out of water usually
don't work well, so they may need some help with respiration. But
high humidity we can do in air, and near-neutral bouyancy is readily
achievable in space.
And, given comparable brain power, I would expect octopi
to be better (or at least have a stronger aptitude) than humans at
three-dimensional navigation.
US$500 fee for receipt of unsolicited commercial email. USC 47.5.II.227