Sure, and they didn't speak English either, but I don't see how that's relevant.

You wrote "humans are good at adaptation, case in point, mass extinction survival". I reply "they weren't human then". The relevance is direct.

Humans: by far the most populous large animals on the planet, thriving in by far the most diverse set of environments in and around the planet, are clearly good at adaptation. The fact that Eskimos and Bedouin and uncontacted amazonian tribes are all the same species is rather remarkable.

If anything, we have a much better shot at surviving the next mass extinction than we had at surviving prior ones, now that we have so many advantages.

I probably won't survive it because I'm a smooth brained weakling, but some humans surely will

I'm not arguing that humans are not adaptable, I'm just pointing out a fallacy in your original argument. Whether humans are adaptable or not is another matter.