Essay talk:The RationalWiki January 2009 Therian Incident

Moving
Why is this here & not on RationalWikiWiki? 14:10, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * It's in both places. If anything, I think (I'm not completely sure why I put it here) it's here to get you over the RWW. --" 14:11, 25 January 2009 (EST)

What's the aftermath at Werelist?  Phantom Hoover  14:16, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Hit this link: http://forums.werelist.net/showthread.php?t=24299 You may need to register if you want to see it. Quite basically, we made fun of CP for awhile, then I noticed the discussion. The found the article on homosexuality quite amusing. But RW did come to everyone's attention- and the reception wasn't good. You came off as doubting beyond reason. 'Course, I can change that- if I wanted to. --" 14:20, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * No, we don't particularly want the respect of your subculture. If you're going to say things like "I'm a vegetarian cheetah/wolf" we won't take you too seriously.  Phantom Hoover  14:23, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Once again: I feel like a cheetah-wolf. I feel the urge to hunt- but I control it. One can be a vegetarian and a carnivore therian. One just has to control their impulses. Oh, and I'm part of the subculture- and you need my respect. I'm more dangerous out of line than in line. --" 14:25, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * No, we really don't need to go out of our way to gain the respect of a small subculture and an unpopular member. You need our respect here.  Phantom Hoover  14:30, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * No, I don't- I think I've proven that I don't need your moral support not to go into HCM. But some of your editors do. I'm not asking you to go out of your way- that's something I'd never ask. I'm asking you not to offend everyone else. And we may be small, but all cultures start out small. Who knows where we will end up? --" 14:32, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I'm not talking about moral support, I'm talking about the fact that you have edit warred with most of the prominent apostrophecrats and have few friends. Your future is bleak.  Phantom Hoover  14:37, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I've always had few friends- but I can survive here, because blocking someone because 'you don't like them' is not allowed, and I never will leave. Phantom Hoover, you might as well learn to like me. I'm not going anywhere, and the only person who can change the way you see me is you- I would not 'un-become' a therian, even if I could. I can't. I have no wish to go insane. --" 14:40, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Don't be so sure; you could be desysopped and reverted every time you make an edit. No one is asking you to stop being a therian (except Toast, and that becomes clearer when you realise she's probably a sock of SusanG, the most intolerant person here).  Phantom Hoover  14:44, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * False. Toast is a sock of TMToulouse, just like everyone here, except me, who's a sock of TK.-Diadochus 15:07, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Also false. I am a sock of Karajou, who is actually a sock of Icewedge, who is actually a sock of myself. --" 15:08, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * A. We don't block. Period. B. Edit warring could, conceivably, be considered grounds for the vandal bin, should it grow out of hand. 21:17, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Moar therian debate
(unident) You need good reason to revert edits- and there are users here who would probably stick up for my rights, even if they didn't like me. --" 14:47, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Correct. I am among them. However, you can't have any fun here if everyone hates you.  Phantom Hoover  14:57, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * You think I'm having fun now? But, we make other user's lifes less fun by bickering. As I said in the essay, we need to put aside our differences. --" 14:59, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * But we won't put aside our principles, and saying that your brain has more in common with that of a cheetah than of a human is ridiculous.  Phantom Hoover  15:02, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Not more in common. Similarities. I see, taste, smell, feel, and hear like a human- albeit a hypersenstive one. But where it counts the most, in my behavior, I show cheetah-like tendencies. Read the entire essay. Then it might make sense. The cheetah is a part of me, not literally, but it is interwoven into who I am, is part of the very fiber of my being. --" 15:05, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I doubt that your behaviours have more in common with a cheetah than of a human, but as I haven't met you I can't say for sure. I have read the essay, but it was difficult (for goat's sake, USE PARAGRAPHS).  Phantom Hoover  15:11, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Here's the problem, CUR. The behaviors you describe are equivocal as to being either irregular human or animal. That you choose to describe them as "animal" rather than "unique, but still human" is your personal decision, not an objective fact. Savvy?-Diadochus 15:13, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Moreover, the very idea that your brain bears a resemblance to that of a cheetah, an animal very distant to us, is very implausible, not least because the genes for it to happen are probably not there, so it is probably more likely that it is subjective.  Phantom Hoover  15:20, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * We know about clinical lycanthropy. Perhaps some of us have something similar- lycan's behave like wolves, and think they are. So, maybe therians just think a bit like wolves (because the damage to the brain is less serious), or whatever their 'type is. --" 17:51, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Bad example, clinic lycanthropy is actually a delusional mental disorder.-Diadochus 17:59, 25 January 2009 (EST)

(unident) I meant something similar- in otherwords, similar wiring of the brain could lead to therianthropy. And therianthropy could be self-promoting- once you have it, your brain's neurons make new pathways. New neuron pathways have been known to happen. --" 18:02, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Serious question: do you think therianthropy happens to animals too? E.g. there could be a goat who thinks and behaves like a cat?   18:20, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I will say this: My cat once tried to stick his head out the window of the car. Or he would have. The window was shut. But he stared out like a dog would. He sleeps like a dog would. --" 18:25, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Amusing, but not necessarily conclusive. I think pretty much any animal in a moving vehicle will try to look out the window.  Plus cats do sleep, in all kinds of positions.  Now if your cat barked like a dog, or ran to catch sticks that you throw for it like a dog, that would really be something.   18:34, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Not conclusive, but interesting. I think it warrants further thought- cats usually just hide and yowl in the car. --" 18:36, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * An old girlfriend of mine had trained her cat (or vice versa) to play "fetch" as dogs do. Evidence: inconclusive.  Topic: stupid.  ħ uman  23:20, 25 January 2009 (EST)

My cat trained us to play fetch with it. It is sort of slow motion -- 2-3 minutes before the cat brings its mouse (it will only fetch one particular type of toy) but the cat will do it for hours using all of its considerable powers of cuteness to keep we humans engaged in the game. Therian-ness is indistinguishable from delusion. Its adherents, by and large, fit the profile of disaffected youth looking to fit in somewhere. Familiar human delusion and wanting to belong trump the hell some mystical or genetic connection with another species. The fact that you self-identify as a an aardvark or whatever and that this self-identification is the primary evidence/symptom of your condition does not, in my eyes, do much to bolster your case. I could claim mental parity with a toaster but that would not make me a cyborg. Perform a test for me. Do a poll to see how many Therians are drama students, D&D nerds and/or goth/emo kids. Furry Cons and Game Cons go hand in hand. I'm betting you'll find the correlation strong. Exasperate me!Sheesh! Not the most impressive contributor here 13:18, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Compromise
Move this to essay/userspace?-Diadochus 14:53, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Done. --" 14:55, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Adding
Someone please add to the essay- just make a different section, stating who you are, and giving a title to your section. I want this to be a community effort. --" 18:39, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * The fact is it doesn't really belong here. Since it's about RationalWiki events, it should be on RWW, where it already is being redeveloped by others.  It can be kept here as an essay, but working on it separately on two different sites seems like a bit of a fool's errand.  Maybe you should keep this one as your essay to express your own views on it, & let other people take over the RWW copy.   19:01, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Understanding Animals
CUR, I want to explain this in a way that doesn't seem jack-assish, but I can't figure out how, so I just will. You don't feel like an animal, especially a cheetah. I don't doubt you think you do, but you can't. My wife is a zookeeper, and deals with big cats specifically, including cheetahs. Cats, and all animals, have abilities and senses we can't even understand. For example, cats can "taste" smells with a special organ in their throat(I can't remember the technical term). We can't even imagine what this is like, because we're not cats. You may feel the need to hunt, but not like a cheetah. Their eyes see differently than yours, specifically they hone in on motion, and have a hard time seeing things that aren't moving. Their spin flexes in a way yours cannot, and you couldn't even begin to imagine. Their whiskers allow them to balance in a way unmathcable by humans.

I'd suggest doing some research, meeting a zoologist, talking about some of these animals. They aren't like us, and we can't even begin to understand what it's like to be them.

I know, I'm a prick.Z3ro 18:51, 25 January 2009 (EST)


 * I am well aware of the ability to taste smells. Similar to the Jacobsan's organ in snakes. I also know of a therian who accidently does something similar all the time- even though it doesn't do anything. I'm not saying my senses are like a cheetah- if they were, no problem. But they aren't. Oh, and I can imagine how their spine flexes- I've studied cheetahs. Always been interested in them. I know that I am not a cheetah, and that I don't see like a cheetah- but therianthropy is about how you feel, your behavior. You're thinking of P-shifting (therian shorthand for shapeshifting)- and that doesn't exist. Not yet anyway. But maybe someday with gene therapy. . . --" 19:00, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * You don't act like a cheetah either, because you can't. That was the whole point of my post.  You can't balance like them.  You can't run like them.  You can't see or smell like them.  Almost nothing about the way you feel or act is like them.Z3ro 19:13, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Don't you think the fact that you have "studied" and been fascinated by cheetahs makes you predisposed, along with some other very human traits, to believe you are one (no, I'm not doing the tortuous parsing here necessary to define what you've said about your "cheetahness"? Can you give us any special insight into cheetahness that does not come form your research or does it all fall into line with stuff you've read? Why are almost all therians cool and iconic animals? Exasperate me!Sheesh! Not the most impressive contributor here 13:25, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Wow.
Please, for the love of Anubis, use paragraphs. Anyways, CUR, your essay interests me in that it shows just how far subcultures go in rationalization, in much the same way as any religion. You assert that "therianotypes" exist. You assert that M-shifting is a real process. You assert that you have a spiritual connection with the cheetah and the wolf. There's a codification here which is quite remarkable, a standardization, if you will, which seems to occur when subcultures congregate and members receive reinforcement from other members.

Now, here's the problem. You claim you are "able to understand the animal so well that you feel like one." I don't care if you think you're an animal, feel like an animal, or whatever. Good for you. But you do not actually feel or think like an animal. You have created notions of what animal instinct, thought, emotion, et al. are, and assume that you have a spiritual or empathetic connection with them by sharing that form of thought. This is utter tripe. Animal consciousness is completely different than you think at a fundamental level. Cheetahs do not "feel the urge to hunt" as you or I might. They hunt.

You do not think like an animal. You think like what you like to think an animal thinks like. (Lovely sentence, no?) You are thinking like an imaginative human. This is why you are not taken seriously by even the most tolerant of us. Going on about the dual necessity of logic and philosophy is fine and dandy, but this is not philosophy. You have constructed an arbitrary, metaphysical concept of the mind based upon an idealized idea of what animals fundamentally are, without any evidence or logic to back you up. This is religion, and frankly, rather stupid religion. I don't think anyone really has a problem with wanting to explore whimsy and fantasy, given the incredible power of the human mind and imagination. But we are not going to take it seriously when you claim that this is psychological and physical reality and demand that it be taken seriously.

In truth, parallels to Scientology are apt. Man is imaginative; man creates a metaphysical explanation of reality from his imagination which explains psychological curiosities; man claims his explanation is physical truth; ????; profit! - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 18:54, 25 January 2009 (EST)


 * IF it was a religion, then this wouldn't exist, no? WolfVanZandt's take. P.S. HCM mode's starting again! --" 19:00, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I don't get the question. Why shouldn't that exist? - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 19:03, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * He is a Christian (evanjelacal at that!). One cannot have two religions at once. --" 19:06, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * One can have multiple beliefs. The distinction of what is a "religion" is rather than arbitrary one.   19:09, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I've met Christian Druids and atheist Unitarians, so why not? Just because one person figures out a compromise position in no way says it's (i) valid or (ii) applicable to anyone but them. --Kels 19:10, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Please, for the love of Anubis, use paragraphs. Anyways, CUR, your essay interests me in that it shows just how far subcultures go in rationalization, in much the same way as any religion [evolution is rationalized too]. You assert that "therianotypes" exist [duh. cheetahs exist, therefore therianotypes exist]. You assert that M-shifting is a real process [another duh. got a better explanation for our experiences?]. You assert that you have a spiritual connection with the cheetah and the wolf [spiritual as in not physical]. There's a codification here which is quite remarkable, a standardization, if you will, which seems to occur when subcultures congregate and members receive reinforcement from other members [I need no reinforcement].

Now, here's the problem. You claim you are "able to understand the animal so well that you feel like one." I don't care if you think you're an animal, feel like an animal, or whatever. Good for you. But you do not actually feel or think like an animal. You have created notions of what animal instinct, thought, emotion, et al. are, and assume that you have a spiritual or empathetic connection with them by sharing that form of thought. This is utter tripe. Animal consciousness is completely different than you think at a fundamental level. Cheetahs do not "feel the urge to hunt" as you or I might [they have hunting instincts, otherwise, they wouldn't play, would they]. They hunt [I noticed]. +

You do not think like an animal [only I know what goes in my brain. stop pretending you do]. You think like what you like to think an animal thinks like. (Lovely sentence, no?) You are thinking like an imaginative human. This is why you are not taken seriously by even the most tolerant of us. Going on about the dual necessity of logic and philosophy is fine and dandy, but this is not philosophy [got proof for that]. You have constructed an arbitrary, metaphysical concept of the mind based upon an idealized idea of what animals fundamentally are, without any evidence or logic to back you up. This is religion, and frankly, rather stupid religion [then how can a therian be a Muslim or Christian, eh? I know ones that are]. I don't think anyone really has a problem with wanting to explore whimsy and fantasy, given the incredible power of the human mind and imagination. But we are not going to take it seriously when you claim that this is psychological and physical [not physical- at least, not physical outside the brain] reality and demand that it be taken seriously [I'm demanding that you leave me alone. there's a difference]. In truth, parallels to Scientology are apt. Man is imaginative; man creates a metaphysical explanation of reality from his imagination which explains psychological curiosities; man claims his explanation is physical truth [pyschological truth, you mean]; ????; profit! - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 18:54, 25 January 2009 (EST &mdash; Unsigned, by: ConservapediaUndergroundResistor / talk / contribs


 * I'm sorry. I tried to be as restrained as possible, but you clearly don't understand what religion, philosophy, metaphysics, or anything else of the sort entails.  Of course you can have "two religions" at once, in the form of a fusion or integration of two normally separate sets of beliefs.  There are Buddhist Christians, Pagan Christians (for thousands of years now), and who knows what else.  It is only organized religions with doctrine that attempt to impose this "strictly one religion's beliefs" system, combined with the simple fact that religions' assertions often conflict.  However, this guy's treatise is proving my point.  He has two sets of religious views, and is attempting to integrate them, just as the Romans attempted to integrate various Gods into their pantheism.


 * As to your "critique," it's your "duhs" which I find most interesting; you argue in an a priori fashion. Do I have a better explanation of your "experience?" Yeah, I do.  It's in your head, like all of the billions of other crazy experiences the human mind is capable of.  No pseudo-Platonic form of the wolf is necessary to explain it, but only the mind itself.


 * Do I have proof that it is not philosophy? Yeah. Philosophy is the attempt to systematically and rationally answer questions of beauty, truth, mind, etc.  Your belief system is neither systematic nor seeks to be purely rational, thus it is religion. Spirit of God, spirit of the wolf, channeling Gaia? Sorry, it's all religion. - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 19:26, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I never said anything about a wolf spirit, except in the sense that someone has a spirit, i.e. a 'soul', i.e. a personality. And the whole point it that it IS the mind itself making me have these experiances. The whole point is that MY mind is doing this to me. Therianthropy is recongizing that fact, that our MINDS can do interesting things to us, and make us have experiances that FEEL non-human. I have species dysphoria- I feel that my species does not accurately represent my true self. Do I want to be a cheetah? No, I enjoy hands to much. Do I think that I would be better suited to a cheetah form? Yes. --" 19:31, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Well that's a simple explanation, and one much easier to understand. However, it appears that extremely few of your Therians see it in such terms, like your previously cited evangelical, who has done his damnedest to reconcile an actual animal spiritualism to Christianity.- Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 19:41, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I've heard of a young therian (a red panda) being dahmed by an ordained preacher (his father) for being a therian. Is it really surprsing that he doesn't want something similar to happen to him? --" 19:45, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Enough of this. Looking over the other threads, it appears I'm making the same points as have been raised ample times before, and thus we are wasting our time.  There is no such thing, physically or mentally, as a "therian." It is an identity construct and social construct.  A vast number of people have powerful imaginations, and some buy into this identity. If you really just wish to be "left alone," stop responding in these threads, which are clearly treading water. - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 20:06, 25 January 2009 (EST)

(unident)Enough of this. There is such a thing, mentally, as a therian. I wish to be left alone. Stop critizing me when you know it won't get you anywhere. As I said in my post 3 posts above, that's what we are. --" 20:09, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * You don't even realize the irony of that statement, do you? --Arcan   ¡ollǝɥ  20:18, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Uhhhhhhhhh. . . No? --" 20:20, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * "I wish to be left alone" - the best way to be "left alone" is not to poke others with a stick and expect them to respond. CUR, you are the ulimate example of someone who does not wish to be "left alone".  You are an attention whore.  ħ uman  23:30, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Call to paragraphing
I hate to be the umpteenth person to mention this, but as it is currently, I'm finding the essay almost impossible to read. Could you please chunk this into paragraphs, CUR? I really would like to discuss it, but I can hardly focus with all the eye strain. Thanks! --Arcan  ¡ollǝɥ  19:03, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * "Wall of text" = "word salad".  ħ uman  23:32, 25 January 2009 (EST)

If You Really Want To Demolish Therianthropy..
Why don't you go here, I'm sure they'll be glad to have you. --" 20:23, 25 January 2009 (EST) P.S. Any questions? I'm sure one of them will eat you- uhhh, engage in constructive dialouge if nessecary. --" 20:25, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Yes, cannibalism, a highly rational response to inquiry. This is completely a cry for attention at this point.  There is only one way to deal with that.  --<font color="#99CCFF">Arcan   ¡ollǝɥ  20:29, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Ack! A joke! And it's actually a cry for un-attention, i.e., leave me alone and go bite off more than you can chew, so I can have the satifaction of watching your positions get demolished. --" 20:30, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * you ask RWites to leave you alone but continually impose yourself on them. Stop the attention-seeking and you will probably lose the attention. Love² 20:39, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * I refute any rediculous claims coming my way. --" 20:40, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * You just sent out an intercom message asking for attention. CUR I can not work out what you are trying to do here, you ask for people not to pay attention to you and then you try to attract it.
 * I also can work out what you were expecting with this therian thing. You come here and tell us you have animal like feeling and expect us to treat this as a rational thing. What is the rational basis? You have some brain theory but you are yet to demonstrate that therian thing exist other than having some people go "I feel like an animal sometimes too". What am I suppose to do with that? It is just a few anecdotes, not evidence.
 * Also I am sick of your victim playing. You are now parroting out HCM, when you instigate theze things against yourself by writing this essay. Why is it here? What are you trying to achieve? The sign at the door said RationalWiki. Find us a peer-reviewed study on this and we might listen until then stop making everyone pay attention to you. - User   20:50, 25 January 2009 (EST)

(EC)::::::First of all: I was bored. Anything would be interesting, from an edit to the goat article to FD vandalizing the Felidae article. Anything. Second of all: I spoke up for therians in one instance, which set this off. If it had never been brought up, this never would have happened. Third of all: I would like nothing more than a peer-reviewed study. But there is no study whatsoever, none backing up your ideas, none backing up mine. No one knows WIGO. If any of you are medical professionals and want to do a case study, fine. I'd be glad to help. I'm sure I could also find some other therians who would help too. But there is no theory now, just idle speculation. You think I'm crazy. I think it's in my brain, but I'm not crazy. It may have a rational explanation. Is it rational? No, of course not. Does it have a rational explanation? Probably, but we don't know- and believe me, there's nothing I would like more. The lack of knowledge on a medical cause disturbs me. I want to know what is happenning to me, and I want help- but not people telling me that I'm crazy without ever having me me. You don't know a therian. You've never met a therian in real life. You haven't studied therianthropy. How would you know? How would any of us know? But if you could help, some of us would be forever grateful. But if you are going to help, you must tolerate our viewpoints! You must try to find a reason for them! THAT'S what science is about- finding an explanation for previously 'unexplainable' phenomanon. Evolution explained an 'unexplainable' occurance. Maybe therianthropy is the new evolution- a discovery that will bring around a revolution in science. Who knows what secrets our minds hold? This could be caused by the environment. It could be caused by our own brains, restructering themselves. Humans could be (this is unlikely, and I doubt it, but it is a possibility, however unlikely) diverging into different species. We don't know what is going on- but I want to know. And I know that there are other therians who want to know too. --" 21:03, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * First off this wiki is not here to entertain you, get a hobby. Second if you don't want this to continue stop creating shit on it, what the hell is this about if not for you to continue this argument? Third, I doubt there is much happening to you that is not happening to any other lonely, socially awkward teenager, trust me I have been there. What you need to do is question are these therian people the solution to my problem or are they creating me another one by sucking me into sub-culture were I feel even more isolated from the people I want to accept me? CUR, I am not going to lie to you the next few years of your life are going to be hard especially if you are a gifted as you say you are. High school and all might seem important now but it doesn't mean shit in 10 years time. Will the other kids accept you? No, you will probably continue to feel quite lonely as you are not like the other kids. One day you will turn a corner, you will probably enjoy college, you are likely to find other intelligent people there who share interests with you. Join clubs, join MENSA if you are that smart. I don't think hanging around people trying to convince you that you are a wolf is really the best thing for you. - User   21:19, 25 January 2009 (EST)

CUR, you need to learn how to spell the word "riduculous". I find it disturbing that you will consistantly defend your erroneous beleifs. You need to open your mind, and see that there is a 95% correlation between theriantropy and Homosexuality and a 76% between that an Atheism. Furthermore, after reading your most recent posts, I find that your understanding of your own beliefs are wrong. To parapharase, you're clueless. Since you refused to heed my last comment, I will give you one more warning before you are blocked for 90/10. Remember, this is a trusworthy encyclopedia. Go edit at Wikipedia if you wish to continue spreading your liberal, evolutionist, anti-Ann Coulter bias. Godspeed. POWER! UNLIMITED POWER! You paid the price for your lack of vision 20:57, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * And they call me a bored teenager. . . --" 21:02, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Didn't you just call yourself one?  21:09, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * No, I'm just bored and a teenager, not a bored teenager. There's a subtle difference. --" 21:10, 25 January 2009 (EST)

Another problem. Animal behaviors doesn't make you an animal. Case in point: this kid.-Diadochus 22:04, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Above, I tried to be as nice and reasonable about this as I could, but I just read this: "But if you are going to help, you must tolerate our viewpoints! You must try to find a reason for them! THAT'S what science is about- finding an explanation for previously 'unexplainable' phenomanon. Evolution explained an 'unexplainable' occurance. Maybe therianthropy is the new evolution- a discovery that will bring around a revolution in science. Who knows what secrets our minds hold? This could be caused by the environment. It could be caused by our own brains, restructering themselves. Humans could be (this is unlikely, and I doubt it, but it is a possibility, however unlikely) diverging into different species. We don't know what is going on- but I want to know. And I know that there are other therians who want to know too." Let's be very clear.  This is bullshit, this is garbage, this is pseudoscientific, self-aggrandizing, baseless woo.  You decide that you feel like an animal, so it must be a new stage in human evolution!  Science can't explain it!  It's a wonderful mystery, an untapped secret of the mind!  For fuck's sake, you wonder why no one takes this seriously?  You call it a viewpoint? Sorry, this is a viewpoint which deserves as much toleration as Phrenology, Animal Magnetism, and YEC. None. - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 00:53, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Thanks for saving me the trouble of reading CURs wall of text and flaming him for being an idiot. PS, I think it's sort of funny that I registered at his pet therian site as "human".  I'm still chuckling. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  01:00, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Ahaha, that is a wonderful bit of irony. - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 01:01, 26 January 2009 (EST)

A thought
CUR, your claim that your position, that therianthropy is caused by brain abnormalities, is on the same ground as ours, that therianthropy is entirely subjective, is false. The implications of your theory for evolutionary biology would be great, and would cause a rethink of common descent, as for your brain to be like that of a cheetah there would need to be cheetah genes present, and as current understanding is that the lineages of humans and big cats split long before the common ancestor resembled either. Therefore, by the principle of extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, the position of subjectivity is favoured. 11:52, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Not really. The basic thing about genes is that they switch on and off, creating new or different traits. Try reading Lenski's e-mail. In it, he specificially states that evolution isn't caused by new genes appearing, it's caused almost entirely by old genes activating. A reccessive gene switched on could have done this to me. If it did or not, I don't know. --" 15:49, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * But the genes for the brains of modern cheetahs are greatly different to those of the brains of the last common ancestor of humans and cheetahs; in other words, the genes for a cheetah's brain are not there to be reactivated in humans. 16:01, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Do you have a peer-reviewed paper showing this? --" 16:03, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * You don't have a peer-reviewed paper showing anything. 16:07, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Yes, but I at least have idle speculation. You have little to no evidence that our genes are that different. P.S. We share 50% of our DNA with fruit flies. Probably most of that goes to the brain- I doubt humans have antennae. --" 16:09, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * I have idle speculation too, and I could probably get the data for you if you wanted it that much. 16:11, 26 January 2009 (EST)


 * The fact that you're arguing this at all is horrifying. You clearly have extremely little idea how genetics and evolution function, how the brain, consciousness, and instincts function, or how they're linked to evolution.  Arguing with you is a pointless proposition; it's like discussing the intricacies of quantum physics with someone who doesn't understand Newtonian mechanics. - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 16:12, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * AAARRGGGHHH!!!! Let it die!!!!11!! <font color="black" face="georgia">Z3ro h3ro  16:13, 26 January 2009 (EST)

(unident)I most certainly do have an understanding of how evolution functions. As for the brain and how it is linked to evolution, if you know something about it, enlighten us. --" 16:14, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * I am not an evolutionary biologist, but I am a passionate lay scientist, and my understanding is that the lineages for humans and cheetahs split millions of years ago, from an animal that had little resemblance to either. Almost all genes shared by humans and cheetahs should therefore be from this ancestor, which wouldn't have had cheetah-like behaviour. 16:18, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Correct. But genes switch on and off. That's how evolution works. 'New' genes don't 'pop' into existance- just ask Lenski. But old genes can reactive- imagine it having the same effect as a retrovirus. --" 16:20, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * But CUR, where would the genes come from? The genes for a cheetah's brain evolved after the lineages split, making virtually the only way for the genes to arrive in humans through a virus, an incredibly improbable event. 16:23, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * And you know this how? --" 16:37, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * (Sorry Z3ro, this is all too funny). Clearly you haven't the slightest clue, as everything you suggest defies the most basic of logic.  You think a recessive gene triggers animal-like instinct in you?  1) The Cheetah is as far removed from its common ancestor with the homo sapien as the homo sapien is removed from it.  Therefore, Cheetah-genes, or Cheetah-like-genes is an impossibility. 2) Individual instincts or mental states are not equal to individual genes.  Genetics and brain structure are absurdly more complex than this.  Show us a single example of a gene turning an instinct on and off, and we might give you the time of day (before all the other absurdities are accounted for). 3) You have no idea what cheetah, wolf, or any other consciousness or instinct entails, making any suggestion of genetic inheritance pure speculation.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and you have none. Best of all, as this sort of evolution should apply to many creatures, why don't we constantly see dogs acting like horses, cats acting like birds, or whatever else, without ever seeing them to learn the behaviour.

So to sum up: it defies evolutionary lineage, has no possible causation, and has not been observed in nature. Are these reasons not enough?- Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 16:29, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Wow, I didn't even know I had that sock. 16:32, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * Edit conflicting with your own sock? Now that is dedication... to something. Kudos! - Gentleman Publius (V)&lt;,&quot;,&gt;(V) 16:36, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * (2nd EC)1) I said it was a possible explanation. 2) I am well aware of that. But it would still be related. Therianthropy is most likely due to a mix of factors, a whole slew of things. 3) You have no evidence that I don't share instincts with them. 4) Why don't you look at the personal experiances described by other therians? The point is, this is happening- but we don't know why. This is just idle speculation on my part. --" 16:37, 26 January 2009 (EST)
 * CUR, just say it. "I was wrong about therianthropy being caused by similarities of the brain to that of a cheetah." Refusing to admit you're wrong when you can't provide a counterargument is intellectual cowardice. 11:58, 27 January 2009 (EST)