Oliver the Human-Chimp Hybrid / Humanzee

a reply to: peacefulpete

Please don't create a pissing-match about our ancestors, and their contributions to the modern world, lol.

Certainly not my intention or what I posted about. That's all in your own head, not mine.

So "Americans" (what, all of them?) would look at the word "Aluminium" in blank incomprehension? I really don't think so. What, they would not understand the word "colour", either? Come on, get real.

Thank you for acknowledging that Oliver's upright gait could have been the result of cruelty and mistreatment, although you then go and spoil it by adding some more nonsense. Tsk.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: peacefulpete

And Oliver... could have potentially been forced to walk upright through cruelty and mistreatment... However, like I said earlier, if that was the case, I'd expect to see more than one example of a monkey walking upright, in all of recorded history.

Again with this never in human history nonsense.

Have you actually tried looking for every recorded chimp in human history to actually say this?

Do you see all of human history simply when you are conscious?

The absurdity of the things you say are at times are amazing.

There's literally not a single other monkey that walked upright, in all of recorded history.

If you want to disagree, then the onus is on you guys to cite a single other example of it. Which doesn't exist.

a reply to: peacefulpete

There's literally not a single other monkey that walked upright, in all of recorded history.

Prove it

If you want to disagree, then the onus is on you guys to cite a single other example of it. Which doesn't exist.

How so

no one but you is making claims about all of recorded history.

"There's literally not a single other monkey that walked upright, in all of recorded history."


I googled on "Monkey walking upright" and - guess what? loads of them;

Monkeys Walking Upright Images

That's you shot down in flames but knowing you, you will keep on flogging this very dead horse.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete

Please don't create a pissing-match about our ancestors, and their contributions to the modern world, lol.

Certainly not my intention or what I posted about. That's all in your own head, not mine.

Lol that is exactly what your intention was, and exactly what you just posted about.

So "Americans" (what, all of them?) would look at the word "Aluminium" in blank incomprehension?

Lol, what? You don't believe me that Americans don't know the word "aluminium?"

Since I've never seen the word before, I looked it up, to see if you were talking about "aluminum" or if you were talking about something else. I thought maybe you were talking about some special alloy or something.

In real life (not online), if you were to walk up to someone and start talking about "aluminium," they would ask you what you were talking about, lol. They'd probably say, "What's 'aluminium?'"

No one would assume you were talking about "aluminum," because if you were, you could have just said "aluminum," lol.

What, they would not understand the word "colour", either? Come on, get real.

"Colour" is obvious enough that it's "color," and it's fairly well-known that it's just the British spelling of it.

Thank you for acknowledging that Oliver's upright gait could have been the result of cruelty and mistreatment, although you then go and spoil it by adding some more nonsense. Tsk.

Oh well. The "nonsense" remains that Oliver is the only case of an upright-walking monkey, in all recorded history. Which is why his case remains so compelling.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: peacefulpete

There's literally not a single other monkey that walked upright, in all of recorded history.

Prove it

If you want to disagree, then the onus is on you guys to cite a single other example of it. Which doesn't exist.

How so

no one but you is making claims about all of recorded history.

That's not how it works.

1. It's impossible to prove a negative... There's no such thing as "proof" that something doesn't exist.

2. However, if something doesn't exist, then it doesn't exist. And it's the default conclusion. The onus is on you guys to prove the opposite, that is, to prove the existence of something that you're arguing does exist.

Your inability to cite proof of the existence of your arguments... leaves us with the default conclusion that it doesn't exist.

a reply to: peacefulpete

Since I've never seen the word before, I looked it up, to see if you were talking about "aluminum" or if you were talking about something else. I thought maybe you were talking about some special alloy or something.

Then your comprehension skills must be virtually non existent! lol!

a reply to: peacefulpete

Lol, what? You don't believe me that Americans don't know the word "aluminium?"

Yes

I know of quote a few Americans that are intelligent and that worked hard to be so and understand the English language quite fine even if its a slightly differing dialect.

I mean simple Google searches elude you, yes you are starting to learn how tie your shoes as you showed that you can use google in another thread or post but so often you make such absurd statement that with a 2 second google search would have not exposed you so badly.

In real life (not online), if you were to walk up to someone and start talking about "aluminium," they would ask you what you were talking about, lol. They'd probably say, "What's 'aluminium?'"

You should try it or even turn on the TV and watch some educational shows where this actually might be brought up.

I believe the show star talk with Neil Degrass Tyson actually made jokes about it.

But hey,

you can speak for all Americans and the friend I have the reside in the states, born in the states are just lying.

"Colour" is obvious enough that it's "color,"

But Aluminium and Aluminum are just so different

Both sets of words have one letter that are right next to each other that are removed but everyone understands colour in the states but everyone is just dumbfounded by aluminium?

Get help bud or lay off the drink and pills when posting

Oh well. The "nonsense" remains that Oliver is the only case of an upright-walking monkey, in all recorded history. Which is why his case remains so compelling.

I knew those pictures in Google were fake

So glad you are here to keep us true

originally posted by: peacefulpete

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete

Oh well. The "nonsense" remains that Oliver is the only case of an upright-walking monkey, in all recorded history. Which is why his case remains so compelling.

Except for all the images of them that I posted for you above! lol!

originally posted by: oldcarpy

I googled on "Monkey walking upright" and - guess what? loads of them;

Monkeys Walking Upright Images

That's you shot down in flames but knowing you, you will keep on flogging this very dead horse.

For goodness sake, it's already well-known that monkeys can walk upright briefly (for a few seconds), and uncomfortably, and awkwardly. Which is what your link shows.

The topic is that Oliver was the only known example of a monkey that only walked upright, all the time, of his own choice.

Which is completely different from what your link is showing.

Plus, Oliver's upright-walk was more stable and human-like. Nothing like a regular monkey awkwardly forcing himself to walk upright for a few seconds, bobbing side-to-side awkwardly.

Oliver's very bone structure was different and more human-like, in his legs and pelvis, which allowed him to walk like a human.

a reply to: peacefulpete

Oliver's very bone structure was different and more human-like, in his legs and pelvis, which allowed him to walk like a human.

It has already been explained to you that this was because of the cramped conditions he was kept in, etc. Do try to keep up at the back.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete

Since I've never seen the word before, I looked it up, to see if you were talking about "aluminum" or if you were talking about something else. I thought maybe you were talking about some special alloy or something.

Then your comprehension skills must be virtually non existent! lol!

...Because I'm supposed to assume that someone means a familiar word, when they say an unfamiliar word? lol.

It would be more logical to expect that someone actually meant something different, or else they could have just used the standard, normal word.

a reply to: peacefulpete

I have no intention of indulging your juvenile penchant for endless yet sterile and forensic argument.

See you next Tuesday.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

"Aluminium" is not a word that's used in American English. Don't know why that's such a problem for you guys, lol. And no, it doesn't reflect on a lack of education or whatever other nonsense you're saying about that. Americans don't have any special obligation to know how British people say "aluminum," of all things, lol.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete

Oliver's very bone structure was different and more human-like, in his legs and pelvis, which allowed him to walk like a human.

It has already been explained to you that this was because of the cramped conditions he was kept in, etc. Do try to keep up at the back.

False. There's no reason to assume that it's the reason.

Plus it's not like there's never been a monkey that was kept in a cage before. Yet, other monkeys kept in cages... didn't suddenly start to walk like a human.

a reply to: peacefulpete

1. It's impossible to prove a negative... There's no such thing as "proof" that something doesn't exist.

There is no negative to prove

Just show the path taken to view all of recorded history to make such a statement.


That is what I asked about and quoted.



But keep playing your games and calling all other trolls

2. However, if something doesn't exist, then it doesn't exist. And it's the default conclusion. The onus is on you guys to prove the opposite, that is, to prove the existence of something that you're arguing does exist.

Records exist.

You were making claims about recorded history I asked you to prove you can make such statement.

as said above just show a path one take to gain this knowledge you have.

For goodness sake, it's already well-known that monkeys can walk upright briefly (for a few seconds), and uncomfortably, and awkwardly. Which is what your link shows. The topic is that Oliver was the only known example of a monkey that only walked upright, all the time, of his own choice. Which is completely different from what your link is showing.

Now you know the intentions of monkeys by simply seeing pictures of them

classic

Plus, Oliver's upright-walk was more stable and human-like. Nothing like a regular monkey awkwardly forcing himself to walk upright for a few seconds, bobbing side-to-side awkwardly. Oliver's very bone structure was different and more human-like, in his legs and pelvis, which allowed him to walk like a human.

explained over and over

Allowed?

His conditions forced his physical structure to change, he walked up right because of how he lived.

You say he chooses to walk upright

Do you?

Can you walk comfortably all the time like a chimp?

hunched back, wrists bent in and used as support on the ground when moving?

No, you would break your wrists very quickly.


Had you been under extreme conditions as you were developing and growing and forced to be in positions that would make walking on all 4s easier then it would be easier but it wouldn't really be your choice would it but how your conditions didn't allow you to develop normally and actually deformed you to be more chimp like or in Olivers case more human like in movement.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete
See you next Tuesday.

Ok I Googled your phrase that you keep repeating:

"See you next Tuesday" is: "A clandestine method of calling someone a c*nt."

Ahh, you're so clever. Bravo!!

a reply to: peacefulpete

No idea what you are talking about. It's Tuesday today and as I have had enough of your wriggly arguing for a bit I thought I'd drop in again next Tuesday. Toodle-pip!

a reply to: InhaleExhale

Again, it's not logical to ask me to prove a negative. There's no such thing as proof that something doesn't exist.

But if something doesn't exist, then it doesn't exist. And that's the default conclusion. Unless someone can bring proof to the contrary, of something that does exist. Which you are unable to do. Therefore, the default conclusion stands.

And again, blaming Oliver's habitual upright walk, on his cage... would make sense if there was more than one example of it happening, in all of recorded history.

But no such luck. There have been thousands of examples of monkeys that were caged, without suddenly starting to walk like a human.

So that's a very lame excuse for Oliver's human-like traits.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: peacefulpete

No idea what you are talking about. It's Tuesday today and as I have had enough of your wriggly arguing for a bit I thought I'd drop in again next Tuesday. Toodle-pip!

Lol. You obviously don't mean the phrase literally, because you've been repeating the phrase for weeks, without ever leaving till Tuesday. I even asked you what the phrase meant, and you refused to say.

So I Googled it, and Google says that it's your way of calling people a c*nt.

Clever, clever!!

*standing applause*