welp.

There's a grain of truth in here, but not quite. One in every four or so (not quite, but we can roll with it regardless) identified species of animal is a beetle. Not one in every four animals, by population nor overall species.

The reasons for this is are many, but may include because beetles are big, easy to catch, agriculturally-significant, and are particularly easy to pin and study, dramatically boosting the count of beetle species we work with on an academic level (lending to higher identification rates). There are also just a shitload of beetle species, naturally.

Scientists estimate something closer to ~10 million species of animals, which would still make beetles a huge percentage of the species, but a far cry from 25%. If you looked at the total number (estimated) of individual animals, beetles are pretty insignificant.

Source: Studied entomology and love me some Coleoptera

Three friends???

I hope I'm Ringo Star, he was always my favourite.

The biomass of all living ants is greater than the biomass of every living human.

As long as we don't count your mom.

What if all my friends are beetles?

One of of every four mammal species are bats.

https://www.nps.gov/articles/bats-brief.htm#:~:text=There%20are%20over%201%2C300%20documented,overall%20status%20in%20these%20parks.

Juice yourself

Welcome to the wonderful world of statistics, shit can look pretty fucky sometimes

Edit: Basically this is a question of distribution in regards to statistics. Ie: statistically speaking you're almost completely hydrogen because our universe is almost completely hydrogen.

Gregor Samsa time whoop whoop

For every different type of beetle there is, and the 1800s tell us there are a great many, there exists a species of parasitic wasp that uniquely targets that beetle.

Knowing my luck I'd be the Stuart Sutcliffe or Pete Best.