Disregarding fictionality, it also includes moths, at least one plant, and maybe arachnids (and controversially perhaps, an ape).

Is there a good reason why dinosaur is only terrestrial extinct reptiles (and a subset at that)?

Do we have a handy term that includes plesiasaur, pteradons and dactyls, as well as dinosaurs?

Danger 5 - A Gerry Anderson-esque team of soldiers works to stop the reich’s escapades and kill Hitler.

抽 - can also mean “pulled” , as well as “suck” or “pump” .

象 - in 抽象 is “appearance, form, shape” , rather than elephant. (Don’t know why they’re the same character, I usually blame imperial name taboo because: why not?)

So 抽象, as abstract is the art sense rather than summary one. But since they’re the same in English, taken across to be the same in Chinese (I guess, I don’t know if papers in Chinese start with a 抽象), so “pulled-distorted form/appearance”.

Less common anglicisation of Samyaza, first amongst the nephilim; a group of Angels that fell by marrying human women and teaching them knowledge.

Yes I am clearly a bit pretentious.

Basic Mandarin is actually pretty easy.

Becoming even day to day fine doesn’t take long and has fewer tricks.

Getting good enough to read literate classics, or use 成语 in your speech though takes a long time and effort.

That reading and speaking are basically independent skills though is odd to folks used to Alphabetic languages.

You can’t write Chinese languages with alphabets, even using tone markers there are too many homophones.

There’s a reason Chinese hasn’t switched to a new writing system the way that Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Hmong, and I’m sure other languages, have.

The cotton is awkward to pick.
It requires careful, dextrous removal from the bush that even modern day robots can’t do well.

More difficult than picking raspberries, apparently.

And I hope we’d not endorse the US’s wet dream of human rights abuse being justification for war.

More complex relations with American Indians:

• In modern day Canada there was much more cross cultural marriage and contact between the American Indians and settlers. You had larger Metis communities, and the settlers were fewer in number and lived in smaller settlements that had more day to day contact with American Indians. Meanwhile, in the 13 colonies, one of the key causes of the rebellion was that the British had ruled out colonial expansion west of the Appalachians. Also, by even this early point many Amerindian tribes had been pushed out of this eastern area, and were more seen as a threat than people to cohabit with.

More complex relations with the French:

• The 13 Colonies were eager for French support against the British from an early point. However, a lot of modern day Canada had been French territory ceeded to the British following the 7 Years War, prior to which there had been much raiding and fighting between the French and British settlers and indeed allied Indian Nations.

Didn’t have a new ruling elite in waiting to give it equal footing in an independent North America:

• The colonial elite of the 13 colonies were much wealthier and generally better travelled and tied into global networks than the elite of the provinces in modern day Canada. They were further from being economically independent, and ceeding from Britain would have made them entirely dependent on the poorer, but much closer colonies to the south, which would’ve greatly limited their political power making them more client than fully independent.

So that’s the longer version. Please help correct my misunderstandings and mistakes.

Because it remained loyalist.

As for why… Probably due to more complex relations with American Indians and the French, and didn’t have a new ruling elite in waiting to give it equal footing in an independent North America.