Setting right perceptions

Remove all ads!

The question was not directed at me, but I believe I understand what caused the miswording. From what I have read and seen, while the membership in close-knit Muslim communities is not based on actual ethnic affiliation, the said communities sure function as if it were. It is an interesting phenomenon where organization of the collective life in certain social circles is concerned. Well, there is also the issue of the modern humans' alleged racial/ethnic identity and the real contents of their genome, but that is a different story.

Ergo, while the word choice is semantically incorrect, it is acceptable from a socio-theoretical standpoint.

/whiteknighting

 

Not where I live. My university had a 'Queer Room', and many of its homosexual events had 'queer' in their title.

 

I personally think we are the only survivors of dwarves, elves and humans/human ancestors.

Neanderthals are short, hairy, and stocky. They've got sterner-looking skulls with their faces located directly in front of their brains, instead of below their brains like AMHS. Total dwarf qualities, right?

There's also a recently discovered homo-??? remain which has a previously undiscovered genome. My bet is that they're elves: medium height, slender, and big eared. Living somewhere near the equator so they're fair-skinned.

Which would mean that some of us (particularly the red-haired freckle bearers) have part ancient-dwarf genome.

Okay, okay. It's equally likely that we all had a common ancestor and homo-neanderthalis/homo-sapeins/homo-??? are simply distant relatives who have altered bodies do to their climate, diet and behavior. But I can still dream that Tolkien was a time-traveling-scribe from the pleistocene!

 

My money is on the multiregional origin... but that would be an entireeeeelyyyyy other thread.

And orcs, do not forget the orcs! I mean... look at homo heidelbergensis!

 

Homo???, the somewhat surprised in-the-closet ancestor.

 

Almost laughed my jaw off. Rep'd!