Your specific claim is that we perform killing BETTER than we do anything else. "Anything" is a pretty broad spectrum of possibilities ;
Wait - what?
Your idea that I said we do it "BETTER" than anything else just isn't correct.
I never said that.
In message ID " on 2015-09-22 3:10 (#50571749)"
Plus you seem to be arguing that humans don't enjoy killing each other? It's what we do best.
Killing each other is simply part of being human. Probably a part of "us versus them", aggression and ability to kill others possibly making for a better chance of survival, and the qualities that might fuel that aggression, like robustness, and high testosterone levels, just aid in the process.
There is also a significant contribution from the archaeology that strongly suggests that cooperation has been an essential part of human survival and success over the millenia of millennia. I suspect that both have been important, probably at different times, and that the evidence isn't sufficient to unambiguously decide the question in favour of one opinion or the other. Whether you look on the generation, ten generations or a hundred generations (which would take us back to Ancient Greece and the first unification of China) is likely to elicit different results.
All I'm saying is that humans have a genetically based component that predisposes us to life ending violence.
If that is true - I'm not ceding that point, is that something that is due to us being humans, or due to us being primates, or due to us being mammals, amniotes, vertebrates, or metazoans. In fact, isn't intra-specific and inter-specific competition a characteristic of life in general? As Darwin pointed out, our most intense competition is with our closest relatives, because their demands for resources are most similar to one's own species. But if that is a general characteristic of life, not a specificcharacteristic of humans.
You might differ, but now you need to show me the research saying we are not inherently violent.
Go back to your claim quoted above : do we (well, humans) do violence better than anything else. Sure we do violence ; I've never claimed otherwise. I've done it myself. And we do other things. But your claim was that violence (more specifically, killing) is "what we do best." So you are comparing violence with all other human activities, and asserting that it is what we do best. So, you have some grounds for comparing violence with, for example, calligraphy or the mythology of the constellations. How do you do that?