@Thedudefrom "In-fact it's fairly common in chess lingo"
That has nothing to do with it being worthless. That I said it's the most worthless term used in chess discussion is an acknowledgement that it is used in chess discussion. This is a truism irrelevant to my point.
"I've heard many grandmasters use terms like computer moves or inhuman while explaining one of their games."
It's still dumb as shit, because nobody can possible decide on what is a "human move" - it is undefinable and impossible to apply in any way that's not completely arbitrary.
That said, I'll admit the term is more meaningful coming from someone who is among the best players in the world, rather than some anonymous, low-rated nobody on the Internet. But the latter is primarily who I see using the term.
What on earth would qualify a person rated so poorly to decide what is a "human move" between two of the highest-rated players of all-time? How arrogant, and how embarrassing. Imagine admitting to thinking that makes sense!