User Controls
Having Neanderthal dna makes you superior
-
2017-05-11 at 6:04 AM UTC(-_-")
-
2017-05-11 at 6:07 AM UTC
-
2017-05-11 at 6:17 AM UTC
Originally posted by AltarEgo Oh look. An emoji'esque response. I never understood you sapiens. Your facial expressions are nonsense without a unibrow.
Real talk. I wonder what the actual actual homo sapiens and neanderthals thought when they saw each other. Also, i wonder if it was taboo to have a neanderthal fetish or homo sapiens fetish.
Or maybe it was like. "Oh you're kind of like me, we'll bang ok?" -
2017-05-11 at 6:27 AM UTCregardless of terminolgy used...if modern taxonomy wasn't so fucktardedly fucktarded...there would be multiple human species.
-
2017-05-11 at 6:28 AM UTC
-
2017-05-11 at 7:36 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie I wasn't. Look up hominid fuccboi. Also everyone understands human to refer to homo sapiens.
You are objectively wrong. I'm guessing you skipped paleoanthropology class. Even BBC articles accept it. Are you saying you are 'more correct' than the BBC?
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150929-why-are-we-the-only-human-species-still-alive
Let's try a dictionary.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/human
"1. A member of the species Homo sapiens; a human being.
2. A member of any of the extinct species of the genus Homo, such as Homo erectus or Homo habilis, that are considered ancestral or closely related to modern humans."
Would you motherfuckin' look at that. Maybe a different one, surely I've cherry picked em.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/human#h2
"consisting of members of the family Hominidae : hominid"
Oh wait I-
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/human
'1.3 Zoology Of or belonging to the genus "Homo"'
I was right bitch. Unless of course you *still* want to push your point. -
2017-05-11 at 9:02 AM UTC
this is so stupid all of it how do I escape this on zoklet. Why are homo erectus posing as humans here?
-
2017-05-15 at 3:45 AM UTC
-
2017-05-15 at 3:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by Discount Whore You are objectively wrong. I'm guessing you skipped paleoanthropology class. Even BBC articles accept it. Are you saying you are 'more correct' than the BBC?
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150929-why-are-we-the-only-human-species-still-alive
Let's try a dictionary.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/human
"1. A member of the species Homo sapiens; a human being.
2. A member of any of the extinct species of the genus Homo, such as Homo erectus or Homo habilis, that are considered ancestral or closely related to modern humans."
Would you motherfuckin' look at that. Maybe a different one, surely I've cherry picked em.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/human#h2
"consisting of members of the family Hominidae : hominid"
Oh wait I-
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/human
'1.3 Zoology Of or belonging to the genus "Homo"'
I was right bitch. Unless of course you *still* want to push your point.
none of that shit is correct. -
2017-05-15 at 3:52 AM UTCGet the fuck out of here snib snab. Your opinion is so worthless I wouldn't wipe my ass with it.
-
2017-05-15 at 3:53 AM UTC
-
2017-05-15 at 3:54 AM UTCI would get more value out of your existence if you just pissed on me instead.
-
2017-05-15 at 3:55 AM UTCbtw it's snab snib not snib snab
-
2017-05-15 at 4:04 AM UTCok sorry snab snib
-
2017-05-15 at 4:15 AM UTC
-
2017-05-15 at 11:13 AM UTC
Originally posted by Discount Whore Even BBC articles accept it. Are you saying you are 'more correct' than the BBC?
This is an appeal to authority, just because the BBC is the BBC doesn't mean they are any more or less right than anyone else.
Originally posted by Discount Whore Let's try a dictionary.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/human
"1. A member of the species Homo sapiens; a human being.
2. A member of any of the extinct species of the genus Homo, such as Homo erectus or Homo habilis, that are considered ancestral or closely related to modern humans."
Would you motherfuckin' look at that. Maybe a different one, surely I've cherry picked em.
Would you motherfuckin' look at that? My definition is right there at the top as well. Let me ask you something. When you're talking to people and someone says "human" do you stop them mid-sentence and ask WHICH KIND OF HUMAN DO YOU MEAN BRO!?.
No of course not because in every day discussion everyone agrees that when someone says human, we mean homo sapiens. Fuck your paleoanthropology class.
Also...
Originally posted by Discount Whore https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/human#h2
"consisting of members of the family Hominidae : hominid"
Oh wait I-
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/human
'1.3 Zoology Of or belonging to the genus "Homo"'
I was right bitch. Unless of course you *still* want to push your point.
It's pretty hilarious to me to see how happy you seem to be "right". I bet that usually doesn't happen a lot to you now does it? -
2017-05-15 at 5:29 PM UTC
-
2017-05-16 at 8:14 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie This is an appeal to authority, just because the BBC is the BBC doesn't mean they are any more or less right than anyone else.
Would you motherfuckin' look at that? My definition is right there at the top as well. Let me ask you something. When you're talking to people and someone says "human" do you stop them mid-sentence and ask WHICH KIND OF HUMAN DO YOU MEAN BRO!?.
No of course not because in every day discussion everyone agrees that when someone says human, we mean homo sapiens. Fuck your paleoanthropology class.
Also…
It's pretty hilarious to me to see how happy you seem to be "right". I bet that usually doesn't happen a lot to you now does it?
I never said your definition wasn't right. There can be multiple definitions to words. But you outright said mine wasn't, and that other homo species aren't considered human. Which is blatantly false.
Get rekkd son -
2017-05-16 at 8:46 AM UTC
-
2017-05-16 at 8:52 AM UTC