Moths have mouthparts, butterflies generally don't. They have a specialized nectar sucking tube type organ with a "tongue" in it.

Moths can rob flowers, which means they cut a small hole inside the bottom of the flower's nectar reservoir and then lap it up. Butterflies can't cut flowers.

>Moths have mouthparts, butterflies generally don't

I'm not sure where you get that information. Butterflies also feed on nectar from plants, so they do have mouthparts.

On another note, some butterflies (and maybe moths) are cannibals [1] and feed on their own caterpillars:

"Some butterflies don’t only look like horror movie stars, but are horrors in themselves. Milkweed butterflies (Danainae) — the same subfamily that includes the regal monarch — are vampiric cannibals that use clawed feet to tear open their own caterpillars and mercilessly suck the guts out of them. But why devour your own offspring from the inside out? It’s an even stranger phenomenon known as kleptopharmacophagy."

[1] https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/milkweed-butterflies-suck-out...

I was talking about nectar robbing by moths, butterflies don't do it. And butterflies only have a tube with a tongue, they don't have opposing jaws or a typical mouthpart. Moths are some of many nectar robbers who will cut a hole or slit in the bottom part of the nectar bearing parts of plants and drink that directly rather than playing by 'the rules' and going down the flower past the reproductive organs. Thus getting the benefit of the nectar without abiding by the "rules" that ensure the plant's pollentation.

I wonder what the advantage is in "nectar robbing". Is carrying the pollen a significant additional effort to an insect?

My guess is that some flowers have a thin shape to force the bees to get covered in polen, the butterfly can use the long tube, but the moth are too wide.

Some moths have mandibles, but most sorts don’t. Further, ‘nectar larceny’ behavior is still the subject of study and appears to possibly help pollination or have a neutral effect in many cases. There also seems to be an indication that some plants are perforated by bees and that certain moths reuse those holes for access to nectar.

As another curiosity, I believe the death’s head hawk moth (as ‘made famous’ by The Silence of the Lambs) can disguise itself as a bee via scent and just take honey from a beehive.

That's not listed here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_butterflies_and_... though certainty possible Wikipedia is wrong.

Indeed, in many languages, even unrelated ones like Finnish, Greek, and Vietnamese, the word for moth is "night butterfly".

In French as well: "papillon de nuit"

In German the category of both is called "Schmetterling" which is also the German word for butterfly, which are technically called "Tagfalter" (day folders). Moths are called "Nachtfalter" (night folder) or simply "Motte" (moth), which technically refers only to specific smaller moths, especially pests.

In german: Nachtfalter ie nightfolder

The word "Falter" is not in fact etymologically related to "falten" (folding), according to Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmetterlinge#Herkunft_des_Na...

If, when in doubt, you assume butterfly unless they have poofy antennae, you'd probably be correct 9 out of 10 times.

I believe it is actually the other way around: butterflies are colorful moths that learned to exist during the day. The moths are also vastly more diverse and numerous.