Koalified shitposter

The difference between telling a funny joke and being funny is whether you ask if they are koalified to make such distinctions.

My friend and I once met a koala holding a little plaquard saying "Bear X-ing" and an arrow pointing to herself. My friend said "She's not a bear!" and I replied that he should look again at ursine.

Ursine?
- Ursine means bear, and sounds like "her sign"
I once met a koala holding a little plaquard saying "Bear X-ing"
Do you live in a Richard Scarry book?

Bears and koalas don't get along, they find each other unbearable.

Dude's pfp looks like a mugshot.

This a perfect demonstration of rote memorization mixed with a lack of critical thinking.

The answer "they're marsupials" doesn't actually answer the question at all. It's just regurgitation of information.

I mean I think it is implied that bears aren't marsupials, thus stating that Koalas are marsupials means there is no overlap, so they must be classified seperately. Namely in a group with other marsupials.
- Ok I'll admit I misread the original post as "why aren't koalas bears?".
  But yeah you're right this does actually answer the question in the OP.
  Edit: nevermind I didn't misread. This doesn't answer the question of WHY koalas are not bears. Taxonomic classifications have logic and reason behind them. So a proper answer would be that bears are placental animals with a longer gestation period. Whereas marsupials have a shorter gestation period and keep their young in a pouch. I'm sure an actual zoologist could give an even more enlightening answer.
  My problem is just that this shows no critical thinking skills at all.
  The answer given here basically amounts to "they are classified differently because they're classified differently."
Not really. Why aren't they bears? Because they're something else entirely. "Why aren't lizards dinosaurs" "because dinosaurs are archesaurs and lizards are reptiles, sometimes they may look similar but they're very different". Its the same reason thst Daniel Radcliffe isn't in line to the throne of England, they're more distant relatives than that.
- I feel like I'm coming off a jerk here but I just think appealing to taxonomy without actually giving any background info or further reasoning is a kinda boring and only a surface level way to answer the question. It doesn't really give the asker much new insight into the topic.
  You answer "ARE lizards dinosaurs" and the answer is valid. But you dont really answer the "why" part of the question (IMO). Someone without a good understanding of taxonomy wouldn't really gain anything from this answer.
  To me this is just A is not B because A is not B, according to the list of As and Bs. Without actually understanding the reasoning we're just left with rote memorization.
  iMO a better way to answer "Why aren't lizards dinosaurs" could be:
  The classification of animals is based on shared ancestry, not just physical appearance. The reptile class split into two major groups after the Permian period:
  Archosauria, dinosaurs and modern crocodile.
  Lepidosauria, modern lizards.
  But how do we know they split?
  A distinguishing feature that sets modern lizards apart from dinosaurs is their gait. Lizards have a sprawling gait. Their legs extend out to the side of their bodies, and they move with a side-to-side motion.
  Dinosaurs, on the other hand, had an upright stance, with their legs positioned directly beneath their bodies, similar to mammals.
Or...... the koalification joke is extremely common to the point of being uninteresting and not even worth acknowledging.
You have to be more clever to impress a more clever person.
As illustrated by themeatbridge in their comment where they come up with the more novel play on 'ursine'.
Whats going on here is probably that this guy tried to hit on a smart girl and she was not impressed by his 6th grader level rizz, and he is now angry that his facile joke wasn't even acknowledged.

It just raises the question why can't marsupials be considered bears.

Because bears are the family ursus which is part of the order Carnivora which falls under the infraclass placentalia. Marsupalia is a different infraclass of mammalia. I know it may be unbearable for them, but they're extremely unkoalafied.
- Yes, but tons of terms we use for animals aren't rigid scientific definitions. When someone says "that's a bear" outside of a scientific context they don't necessarily mean that. A good example being trees.

Koala and Quali- aren't pronounced anything alike.

Australia

What gives you koalifications to make that judgement?
- I've seen Costa on TV.
You are the nerd this meme is about.