My brain register chimpanzees as animals, despite the obvious similarities, but when it comes to the bonobo, I get a slight uncanny valley feel and somehow I see one of us.
A twisted, bizarre version of us, that's still not human, with an appearance that maybe is closer to us than their intelligence, which all in all is impressive compared to other animals, but still can't overcome the abyss between our minds.
I almost feel that I could have a basic conversation with one, or that they'd build a civilization, however primitive. But instead, at the end of the day, they're just another animal in the zoo, even if they're among the smartest
And I wonder what other hominids/hominins felt when seeing each other, and what does a bonobo or chimp feel when seeing us. We know that sapiens and neanderthals mixed, but they were close enough to be able to reproduce (and some men will frick anything). Modern humans crossed paths with late erectus and earlier ancestors must've also seen other close cousins, who must've been in direct competiton. Needles to say, we're the only survivors
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
>But instead, at the end of the day, they're just another animal in the zoo, even if they're among the smartest
They used to keep blacks in the zoo, you know.
Average maternity ward in the UK
Chimps should be in the genus Homo
No homo
weird innit
Shout out to all Mexicans out there.
Gotta be one of my favorite genders.
bonobo female will totally frick a human male willingly.
t.knower
Apes mixed and continued to mix and for the longest in the ape homeland of Africa long after humans existed. Some humans kept mixing and this accounts for them taking evolutionary backwards steps.
Science is just catching up with this. Learning of the significant dna percent of pre human species mixed in some african groups.
Evolution wasn't a linear process, different species could breed and some kept breeding with ancestors of humans and progressed much slower.
Just as most horse type animals can breed, most cats, canines, etc There was different apes that mixed to make up different humans.
When different species mix the male offspring is often sterile, but not always, and the female offspring is fertile quite often. So others of either species can continue to breed further with the fertile offspring until eventualy the hybrid is actually a permanent fully fertile species.
Of course some monkey and ape species have hiv and other disease strains going back thousands of years they are partialy resistant to but kill other species when contracted. So planet of the apes probably sucked.
Science is just catching up with this. Learning of the significant dna percent of pre human species mixed in some african groups.
This is false.
It's just a meme from /misc/
any source? seems to be true
Any anon on this image board that starts stating high mighty statistics should have sources to back it up to begin with so they put their money where their mouth is. But the responsibility is not on
to do that, it is on
as that anon made the claim to begin with. However what he is saying does sound familiar to me regarding different ethnic populations having higher amounts of pre-human hominid dna, but iirc it was more about east asia than it was africa.
> But the responsibility is not on
This is false.
It's just a meme from /misc/ # to do that, it is on
# as that anon made the claim to begin with.
Sure, but if someone is stating something is false they should also be capable of showing why, like I said, I vaguely remember it being true myself, hence why I’m not asking for proof from the other person
It's not false, what is false is "pre human" because the unknown hominids are considered to be just archaic humans, like neanderthals and denisovans are. We just can't figure out which archaic human species the DNA belongs to. It's probably just another fricking "neanderthal". Even liberpedia is glad to corroborate this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_population
>According to a study published in 2020, there are indications that 2% to 19% (or about ≃6.6 and ≃7.0%) of the DNA of four West African populations may have come from an unknown archaic hominin which split from the ancestor of Sapiens (Modern Humans) and Neanderthals between 360 kya to 1.02 mya.
We also know that there is no rational basis for african inferiority. Africans are actually as whites were 300 years ago. Just give them a century of back to back great wars and all the violent morons and dog eaters will be as scarce as they are in germany today, when just 300 years prior germans with militant, mercenary savages that stole pets to make schnitzel.
>We also know that there is no rational basis for african inferiority.
what a strange and tenuous thing to claim
>Africans are actually as whites were 300 years ago.
parts of africa still can’t sustain farmland on their own without heavy assistance from outside groups, that’s quite a bit more than 300 years behind the rest of the world
many ethnicities in africa dont even have the sense of passage of time/transformation of matter programmed in their basic instincts
is that why they think shooting someone for $50 is worth spending the rest of their life in prison?
Source? Sounds interesting.
Ive read about it years ago but cant find the exact source. Its something regarding how some african languages dont have words for time units/past-present/future, so these concepts shouldn't really exist in their subconsciousness
NTA but the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (the idea that language influences worldview rather than v.v.) is largely contested and pretty much deboonked. What the study you're referring to might have been saying is that some African languages don't have tense morphology (i.e. a word or suffix that specifically means "happened", "is happening" or "will happen). A lot of languages don't, but they're still able to understand linear time. For example, a very common way languages like that encode something happening in the future is to say something like "go towards [verb]", just how even English does it, like "I'm going to rape you".
Stick your nose in enough anthropology books and you'll learn that Subsaharan Africa is a surprisingly genetically, culturally and linguistically diverse place, even if they all seem to be Stone-Age dark-skinned big-lipped Black folk.
>Stick your nose in enough anthropology books and you'll learn that Subsaharan Africa is a surprisingly genetically, culturally and linguistically diverse place, even if they all seem to be Stone-Age dark-skinned big-lipped Black folk.
i mean, I don’t see why both can’t be true
>unknown
it's literally homosexual erectus africanus holy shit stop being moronic.
denisovan, neantherdal, africanus and sapiens are all sibling species product of erectus migrating everywhere. africanus are just the homos that went south before sapiens formed in the horn of africa. to literally no one's surprise the bipedal social mammal had 0 problems with putting their dicks in vaguely similar bipedal social mammals.
it's been overdeboonked and will most likely get undeboonked soon as neurological studies keep proving neuroplasticity is insanely powerful.
>A twisted, bizarre version of us
Funny you should say that OP. They are us in the most literal sense.
"Bonobos" do not exist.
>in the most literal sense
Why is putting a human to jail not animal abuse? Because humans are literally animals right?
Locking up a dangerous animal is not animal abuse. Killing it isn't either
Redpill me
I assume that only one branch of humans surviving was always going to be the result. Humans are too competitive
>"60 minutes"
>12 minute video
BOOBA
>The bonobo's head is relatively smaller than that of the common chimpanzee with less prominent brow ridges above the eyes. It has a black face with pink lips, small ears, wide nostrils, and long hair on its head that forms a parting. Females have slightly more prominent breasts, in contrast to the flat breasts of other female apes, although not so prominent as those of humans. The bonobo also has a slim upper body, narrow shoulders, thin neck, and long legs when compared to the common chimpanzee.
Bonobos probably retained more anatomical features of the common ancestor of humans and chimps/bonobos. They could also have developed traits that favored less aggression and that, in turn, made them look more neotenous and human like
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo
The age of multiple human species existing at the same time must have been a wild one. Bonobos could probably evolve true bipedalism quicker than other apes. It's a shame we don't have a great fossil record of prehistoric human feet, I'd be interested to know how long we retained those giant foot-thumbs.
Imagine punching someone with a foot hand
>The age of multiple human species existing at the same time must have been a wild one
We're still living in it.
ehh.
abbos are def denisovans
>We're still living in it.
proofs?
california
...so no proofs, got it.
People like this think abbos should count as a separate species, or at least subspecies, as homosexual sapien despite every researcher into this topic disagreeing. They're really quite racist.
>people say what they need to say in order to keep the metaphorical gun to their heads from going off therefore true 🙂
ok
knew you’d be here!
I am where I am always needed anon
Abos
Those aint humans
they are incel and i'm glad that fact makes you seethe
Im confused do you bang abos? Are you okay m8?
seethe my little man, seethe
>t.
More closely related to euros and asians than to euros are to salmon.
absolutely mogged
Been to detroit lately