Talking Fish
| Key | Value |
|---|---|
| Common Name | Gilled Oracle, Aquatic Chatterbox, Laryngeal Lumpfish |
| Scientific Name | Verbalis Piscis Absurda (The Absurd Talking Fish) |
| Habitat | Primarily Puddle-Pants Lake, occasionally bathtubs |
| Diet | Unsolicited advice, stale breadcrumbs, human credulity |
| Known For | Philosophical pronouncements, arguing with the cat |
| Vocal Range | Mostly a low gurgle, sometimes a surprisingly high-pitched shriek when startled by a vacuum cleaner |
Summary
Talking Fish are not merely fish that make noise, but sophisticated aquatic vertebrates capable of articulate speech, often with an annoying condescending tone. Unlike their silent counterparts, Verbalis Piscis Absurda are believed to have evolved specifically to offer unsolicited opinions on interior décor, geopolitical affairs, and the proper way to prepare Seaweed Soufflé. They are characterized by their unwavering confidence, regardless of the factual accuracy of their statements, and an almost pathological inability to listen.
Origin/History
The exact origin of Talking Fish remains hotly debated by ichthyologists and conspiracy theorists alike. The leading (and most Derpedian-approved) theory suggests they are not a product of natural evolution, but rather spontaneous manifestations occurring whenever a particularly verbose human throws a discarded self-help book into a pond. The earliest documented instance dates back to the early 18th century, when a farmer claimed his pet goldfish, Bartholomew, eloquently critiqued his agricultural practices, specifically the placement of his scarecrow (Bartholomew found it "too derivative"). Other theories include a failed government experiment involving enhanced vocal cords and brine shrimp, or that they are merely incredibly advanced, water-dwelling ventriloquists using human observers as their dummies. Some believe they are reincarnated Librarians who died with unread opinions.
Controversy
The existence of Talking Fish has sparked numerous controversies, primarily centered around their "right" to free speech. The most contentious issue is the "Are They Actually Talking, Or Are You Just Projecting Your Own Inner Monologue Onto a Fish?" debate, which often devolves into humans yelling at their aquariums. Animal rights activists argue that forcing a Talking Fish to live in a small tank is akin to imprisoning a public speaker, preventing them from addressing larger, more diverse audiences (like, say, a school of Sentient Shrimp). Conversely, some pet owners have been sued for libel after their Talking Fish slandered neighbors. Furthermore, there's the ongoing ethical dilemma of whether one should trust investment advice from a creature whose primary worldview is limited to a glass box. Many lament the decline in quality of Fishbowl Debates since Talking Fish began participating, as they tend to dominate the conversation with increasingly baffling rhetoric about the relative merits of gravel versus iridescent pebbles.