Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Are humans apes?

Page 3 of 6 [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

29 Nov 2012, 6:00 pm

These labels are all artificial. Yes we are a kind of ape. We are also a kind of fish, and a kind of bacteria. Literally our grandparents were fish if you go back far enough. It all depends on how you want to define and categorize life on Earth.



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

29 Nov 2012, 6:06 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
TallyMan wrote:
AspieOtaku wrote:
Yes..yes we are.. now where's my banana?!


You'll have to wait a minute. I'm still counting them. :wink:


Daylight come and me wanna go home!
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQXVHITd1N4[/youtube]Come Mr Tallyman Tallyman banana!!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,550
Location: Aux Arcs

29 Nov 2012, 6:15 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
TallyMan wrote:
AspieOtaku wrote:
Yes..yes we are.. now where's my banana?!


You'll have to wait a minute. I'm still counting them. :wink:


Daylight come and me wanna go home!


I always thought of TallyMan in a room with computers all around him,and he's scrolling,scrolling down and a rich voice is singing with a Caribbean beat "Come Mr TallyMan,TallyMan Ba - Na- Na....... :lol: I've got a good visual of it and it's happy.



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

29 Nov 2012, 7:52 pm

Are superhumans human?



AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

30 Nov 2012, 5:51 am

androbot2084 wrote:
Are superhumans human?
They are truly super and yet human!!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

30 Nov 2012, 2:16 pm

AspE wrote:
These labels are all artificial. Yes we are a kind of ape. We are also a kind of fish, and a kind of bacteria. Literally our grandparents were fish if you go back far enough. It all depends on how you want to define and categorize life on Earth.

Not correct. Humans must be classified as apes to avoid a paraphyly (that is, an invalid taxonomic grouping) if we want to classify both chimps and orangutans as apes. No such difficulty appears to arise in defining bacteria in a clade that excludes humans, or in fish if you are sufficiently careful.

Humans also must be included in the category of "monkeys," so long as we want to keep both Old World Monkeys and New World Monkeys in that category.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

07 Jan 2013, 7:14 pm

Orwell wrote:
AspE wrote:
These labels are all artificial. Yes we are a kind of ape. We are also a kind of fish, and a kind of bacteria. Literally our grandparents were fish if you go back far enough. It all depends on how you want to define and categorize life on Earth.

Not correct. Humans must be classified as apes to avoid a paraphyly (that is, an invalid taxonomic grouping) if we want to classify both chimps and orangutans as apes. No such difficulty appears to arise in defining bacteria in a clade that excludes humans, or in fish if you are sufficiently careful.

Humans also must be included in the category of "monkeys," so long as we want to keep both Old World Monkeys and New World Monkeys in that category.


Our ancestors were nevertheless bacteria and fish as well as apes and monkeys. Read Dawkins' The Ancestor's Tale.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

07 Jan 2013, 7:25 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C6NkRUbI38[/youtube]


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Anomiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,023

07 Jan 2013, 7:47 pm

AspE wrote:
Orwell wrote:
AspE wrote:
These labels are all artificial. Yes we are a kind of ape. We are also a kind of fish, and a kind of bacteria. Literally our grandparents were fish if you go back far enough. It all depends on how you want to define and categorize life on Earth.

Not correct. Humans must be classified as apes to avoid a paraphyly (that is, an invalid taxonomic grouping) if we want to classify both chimps and orangutans as apes. No such difficulty appears to arise in defining bacteria in a clade that excludes humans, or in fish if you are sufficiently careful.

Humans also must be included in the category of "monkeys," so long as we want to keep both Old World Monkeys and New World Monkeys in that category.


Our ancestors were nevertheless bacteria and fish as well as apes and monkeys. Read Dawkins' The Ancestor's Tale.


Yes, but that doesn't mean that we aren't primates (and in the Great Ape family - Hominidae). Good that you discovered that it's all fluid, but that doesn't change that some species are more related than other species. Funny you talk about Dawkins as he is one of the most prominent educators on us being apes, with his "African ape" thing and everything :)

Quote:
"We admit that we are like apes, but we seldom realise that we are apes."— Richard Dawkins


Also, this
Quote:
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Anthropoidea
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

07 Jan 2013, 8:28 pm

Quote:
Are humans apes?


I'm not.
I'm descended from dogs.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

07 Jan 2013, 8:41 pm

Raptor wrote:
Quote:
Are humans apes?


I'm not.
I'm descended from dogs.


Dogs, and not birds? You mean your avatar isn't a photo of you!?!?!?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

07 Jan 2013, 8:51 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Quote:
Are humans apes?


I'm not.
I'm descended from dogs.


Dogs, and not birds? You mean your avatar isn't a photo of you!?!?!?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Bird dogs, then...


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,682
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

07 Jan 2013, 8:56 pm

Claims are they found the gene where two fused to bring 48 to 46?

I think you'd run into much fuzz trying to call us apes as you would trying to call apes humans though. Best analogy: if you create a molecular compound from two precursors it includes its precursors but it doesn't have the same qualities so calling it by its precursors is deceptive to its behavior and attributes. Similarly there's no scientific quality of human or ape aside from genetic manifestation, such things are really just cognitive constructs.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

08 Jan 2013, 9:10 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Claims are they found the gene where two fused to bring 48 to 46?

I think you'd run into much fuzz trying to call us apes as you would trying to call apes humans though. Best analogy: if you create a molecular compound from two precursors it includes its precursors but it doesn't have the same qualities so calling it by its precursors is deceptive to its behavior and attributes. Similarly there's no scientific quality of human or ape aside from genetic manifestation, such things are really just cognitive constructs.



Calling humans "apes" is like saying that blue jays are "birds".

Saying that apes are "human" is like saying that all birds are "blue jays".

Not same thing at all.

Humans are one species. Apes are several. Just like blue jays are one species and birds are 10 thousand. You cant have the single species tail wag the larger taxomic group dog.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,682
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

08 Jan 2013, 9:31 am

naturalplastic wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Claims are they found the gene where two fused to bring 48 to 46?

I think you'd run into much fuzz trying to call us apes as you would trying to call apes humans though. Best analogy: if you create a molecular compound from two precursors it includes its precursors but it doesn't have the same qualities so calling it by its precursors is deceptive to its behavior and attributes. Similarly there's no scientific quality of human or ape aside from genetic manifestation, such things are really just cognitive constructs.



Calling humans "apes" is like saying that blue jays are "birds".

Saying that apes are "human" is like saying that all birds are "blue jays".

Not same thing at all.

Humans are one species. Apes are several. Just like blue jays are one species and birds are 10 thousand. You cant have the single species tail wag the larger taxomic group dog.
Can you make a genetic argument for that though? 46 resulting from 2 fused chromosomes is only 48 in actuality if its read as 48. Its a pretty simple and straight-foward claim.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

08 Jan 2013, 10:47 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Claims are they found the gene where two fused to bring 48 to 46?

I think you'd run into much fuzz trying to call us apes as you would trying to call apes humans though. Best analogy: if you create a molecular compound from two precursors it includes its precursors but it doesn't have the same qualities so calling it by its precursors is deceptive to its behavior and attributes. Similarly there's no scientific quality of human or ape aside from genetic manifestation, such things are really just cognitive constructs.



Calling humans "apes" is like saying that blue jays are "birds".

Saying that apes are "human" is like saying that all birds are "blue jays".

Not same thing at all.

Humans are one species. Apes are several. Just like blue jays are one species and birds are 10 thousand. You cant have the single species tail wag the larger taxomic group dog.
Can you make a genetic argument for that though? 46 resulting from 2 fused chromosomes is only 48 in actuality if its read as 48. Its a pretty simple and straight-foward claim.


No idea how this is relevent.

Chimps, and each of the other non human great apes (gorillas, Orangs) have 24 pairs of chromosomes.

Humans only have 23.

However-they recently discovered that our chromsome pair no. 2 is really two of the ape chromosomes stuck together end to end. So we really have the same 24 pairs of chromosomes that our ape cousins have. One pair just got fused together.

So that would be further evidence, on top of much else, that we are not only desceded from apes-but are still a type of ape. We are not just a species related to a group of species- we are member of that group of species.

But apes are several extant species (and an even greater number of exitinct species), and humans are just one species.

So what does any of this have to do with shoe horning the larger taxomic group (apes) into the smaller pigeonhole (human)?