Questions about example sentences with, and the definition and usage of "Humans"

A:
「推測しなければならなかったら、あなたは 〜 とおもいますか？」その例しか思いつきません ^^;
「答えを言えなければならない場合」と同じ意味です

ふつうに「次の千年に人間は絶滅すると思いますか?」と聞かれたら、「わかりません」と答えるのは可能ですが、「推測しなければならなかったら、あなたは 〜 とおもいますか？」と聞かれたら、yes か no しか答えません

A: You are too familiar with these humans. You have spent too much time with these humans.

A: It means something like "Behold, the representation of the human species". The comment brings the contents of the video and its popularity to the reader's mind. "The contents of this video contrast with the generally accepted idea that humans are cerebral beings of a divine nature, which we all learned as we grew up. That, combined with how popular the video is, is a bad joke." This is the meaning.

A: humans that can look like anyone.

A: it means that when a person smiles it usually means that he/she wants to be friendly or is willing to help you. The phrase 'draw back the corners of their mouths' simply describes what happens to the mouth when a person smiles.

A: Wanna see how i'm masturbating? Search me here - https://krluv.com My nickname - Krystalll3 ;)

A: The first sentence is correct because when you say “existence” you’re talking about a being so you have to use a possessive pronoun to establish whose existence it is -> “their”

A: The meaning is very similar.

"When it comes to" means "for" or "about" or "regarding". "You take" also means that, but can also mean "for example" or "considering".

A: a few = the number of differences is not big.

Little differences = the differences ( number of which we do not know) are miniscule, hardly noticeable.

A: Im not sure there are differences between the two words themselves.
For example, you could say “People are kind” or you could say “humans are kind” and it would mean the exact same thing!

A: There’s no difference

A: To: destination, distance, comparison, purpose + verb, time.

For: function, benefit, purpose + noun, duration.

Did you understand?

A: Check the question to view the answer

A: 1.

"X were it not for Y" is like "If not Y, then X". X would be true or possible or desirable, but Y prevents it.

It would be quiet outside were it not for the cats fighting in the backyard. (= "it is quiet outside" is not possible because "the cats fighting in the backyard" is happening)
She would be beautiful were it not for the big scar on her forehead. (= "she is beautiful' is not true because "the big scar on her forehead" prevents it)

The word in the blank can't be "no". "No age-related diseases" do not prevent "humans live on indefinitely".
It can't be "little". "Little" can only modify uncountable nouns.
It isn't "few". "Few" emphasizes the small number of something. It sounds strange to use "were it not for" to emphasize the problem of "age-related diseases", then immediately use "few" to minimize it.
That leaves "some".

A: Though humans speak of peace, goodwill, and so on, they don't stop fighting.
Thinking about this, there has been no century in human history without war.
Are humans inferior to beasts?

A: 【直訳】
Human lifetimes and their ability to do things is limited.

We constantly worry about whether what we have done has borne fruit, and we tend to try to do many things, but the only person who becomes successful someday is the person who can work on one thing earnestly without giving up.

I worry if I'll ever be able to truly speak English, but I'll continue to write this journal every day.

【もっと自然な英語】

Everybody has limited time and ability.

We tend to constantly move from one task to another, worrying when we will see results, but the only way we can be successful is to be diligent and earnest on one task at a time.

I'm worried if I'll ever truly be able to speak English fluently, but I'll keep writing in this journal regardless.

A: Maybe this: Humans would have to experiment with new drugs on humans if they aren't allowed to use animals.

This is a bit more natural : We would have to experiment with new drugs on humans if we aren't allowed to use animals.

Or: If we aren't allowed to use animals, we would have to experiment with new drugs on humans.

Or: If we aren't allowed to experiment with new drugs on animals, we would have to experiment on people instead.

A: I'm not sure if I can understand it. Tell me if it is what you are looking for.

Why have humans constantly started countless wars since the beginning of human history?

A: good but you can use "benefited from the use of fire" instead to be more clear