Are humans apes?
You'll have to wait a minute. I'm still counting them.
Daylight come and me wanna go home!
_________________
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
You'll have to wait a minute. I'm still counting them.
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....... I've got a good visual of it and it's happy.
_________________
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
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
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
Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C6NkRUbI38[/youtube]
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
Also, this
Phylum: Chordata
Subphylum: Vertebrata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Anthropoidea
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: sapiens
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,796
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
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
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
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.
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
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
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.
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.
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)?
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Why did We Apes Lose Our Tails? |
08 Mar 2024, 1:25 pm |
New Trailer for "Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes" Online! |
05 Apr 2024, 6:55 pm |
Why Don't Humans Have Tails? |
24 Mar 2024, 7:33 pm |
Why Do Cats Rub Their Heads On Humans? |
22 Apr 2024, 7:29 am |