Okay I’ve been thinking more about @rainbowratsstuff’s ‘humans are extinct’ au and while I know that the whole “humans are goddamn weird” concept has been played with in sci-fi settings, imaging the riverbankers&co – who have never seen a primate – trying to understand what humans are is the funniest thing
like, humans have binocular vision (both eyes facing forward) which is common mostly in predators, BUT human teeth are obviously not designed for attacking, and neither do we have claws so, alright, the riverbankers probably presume we didn’t evolve to take down prey even with our canines and binocular vision
the other argument on the riverbank is that humans might have arboreal (tree climbing) origins because binocular vision is good for depth perception and if you’re jumping around maybe it’s not a bad thing to see how far you gotta leap BUT humans don’t have tails for balance, nor feet to grip branches so, like, that doesn’t track
(the lack of tails has led to some animals theorising that humans were underground creatures, BUT then again humans don’t have claws for digging or any kind of whiskers for navigating through the dark)
in fact the only concrete theories they have is that humans were diurnal (active during the day) because humans have no whiskers and there’s evidence humans had colour vision, which is usually a trade-off for decent low-light vision so there’s no way humans had evolved to navigate through night
everything else about humanity is up for grabs
(don’t even get riverbankers started on human’s lack of fur. they have no idea)
