fchan

discussion

Furry Can be really maby.

Pages:1
1Report
shadowfox at 22 Jan 2008: 13:13

I Thought of something Very interesting i thought id share. In sceince it says man was apes before evolutoin. therefor what if a fox evolves. where they turn staind up and all just like a Furry. I Do relize the time that it would take to evolve would probly be after the atmosphere goes out. But what if it does happen. that means We will have A real Furry!

And a question Would you get yiffy with the furrys XD <My anser YES!>

2Report
seddy at 22 Jan 2008: 13:32

And people might have evolved into dumb beasts again by that time.

And no I would not yiff a real animal, no matter how smart it is.

3Report
Shadowfox at 22 Jan 2008: 13:48

You wouldent Yiff a furry in rl? O_O I Dont know you any more waaahhh <Runs away>

4Report
at 22 Jan 2008: 14:13

>>2 Aren't we Animals?

5Report
Bizzle at 22 Jan 2008: 14:33

Well, I'd give our cousins in the ape family roughly thirty-five thousand years before they become what we now consider to be intelligent.  There is one subspecies of chimpanzee that has begun creating simple tools, though, so maybe not even that long.  Non-ape mammals would likely take millions of years if they evolve that way at all.  Sorry, I don't think Darwin is going to help you out there.

>>4  Are we not men?

(Answer:  we are Devo)

7Report
at 22 Jan 2008: 15:07

To the yiff question: Would you fuck an ape? -.-

To the evoulution question: why should they evolve into a humanoid form? They'd degenerate since the way e.g. foxes live by now, a humanoid form would be a stupid thing ;)

8Report
seddy at 22 Jan 2008: 15:22

>>7
Didn't the Russians and Chinese run some experiments during the cold war with female human prisoners being impregnated with male chimps to create the ultimate warrior?

>>3
No I wouldn't. I don't think a furry irl would be very attractive, it would be too much of an animal (other than human) to my taste. Also I like gay furry stuff, but I would never fuck a dude irl. The 'real' thing will just burst my bubble.

9Report
at 22 Jan 2008: 15:28

..This thread is retarded, sorry.

10Report
Shadowfox at 22 Jan 2008: 16:43

Very int4eresting. Made this thread when i was eating lots of Sugar XD. Any how the responces show that Alot of you all Are VERY Smart. I Would like to hear more on the evlotion topic its always interested me much.

11Report
at 22 Jan 2008: 18:03

Minor.

12Report
at 22 Jan 2008: 19:38

The first question would be, can you prove the partner is sapient?
The second question would be, can you prove the interaction would be safe (pertaining to hygene, diseases, and physical interactions)?
The third question would be, do you love your partner, and vice versa?

13Report (sage)
sage at 23 Jan 2008: 01:21

>>9

Don't be.

14Report
at 23 Jan 2008: 07:07

>>11
What he said.  I think the only two ways that anyone over the age of consent could possibly think and type like the way the owner of this thread does are, it's a troll, or he's got a mental problem.  But on topic, there's no way, the only reason man evolved from apes is because we were similar enough genetically.  It's all about the chromosomes really.  A fox isn't just going to suddenly go sapient, that's just well..What 9 said.

15Report
at 23 Jan 2008: 07:47

>>14
Denial: being sapient is heavily related to mental development, which is not limited by physical form.
a) First, you have to actually define what it means to be sapient.
b) After definition, you've to have a set of tests to determine if such sapience exists in other creatures.

The tricky part of the question involves these two facts. Our own biases prevent us from making a proper definition of sapience. A lot of creatures may already be sapient, but we lack the proper means of testing.

The manner in which a person types doesn't mean that they are a minor. Depending on their original language, they may use weird grammatical structures. Depending on their mental makeup, they may communicate in a non-traditional manner. (In that they may have mental issues, but they're not necessarily a problem)

Addendum: I neglect a 4th point in >>12: whether the partner can properly consent.

16Report
at 23 Jan 2008: 17:38

We've got a great test for sapience, actually.  One that anthropomorphics as idealized in te fandom would easily pass. 

Once a critter is sapient to the point that there's no longer any doubt, then it's obviously sapient.  For most humans and aliens and furries, that'd be the point at which they demonstrate their self awareness by offering to stuff your sapience test up your ass.  :)

Dolphins just lack the arms.  Once they get those, all you 'dolphins are dumb' folks arte going to be sore the next day... 

17Report
at 23 Jan 2008: 21:03

>>16
No we don't.
a) You claim sapient without any doubt without using any scientific measuring mechanisms or definitions. Without said mechanisms, there'll always be doubts. Without a strict degfinition of sapience, there'll always.
 - The only reason why anthropomorphics are assumed to be sapient is because they inherit the quality directly from humans, which are assumed to be sapient.
b) By your definition, strict buddhists would fail the test of sapience, since they do not believe/encourage in violence. Strict Christians would similarly fail the test because they believe in forgiveness. A test has to at least satisfy all currently applicable examples which are known to be true.

18Report
at 23 Jan 2008: 21:35

>>17
Whoosh! 

19Report
A disgruntled dolphin at 23 Jan 2008: 22:59

>>16
FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME, I AM NOT JUMPING THROUGH ANYMORE FIREY HOOPS INTO GIANT PAIRS OF PANTS.

20Report
Every Dolphin on Earth at 23 Jan 2008: 23:26

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

21Report
at 24 Jan 2008: 01:58

>>10
>>...Alot of you all Are VERY Smart...

OH LAWD

22Report (sage)
M'aiq the Liar at 24 Jan 2008: 07:41

*mercilessly beats OP with a baseball bat*

23Add Reply
Name Sage? - captcha =
First Page - Last 40 - Entire Thread

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage