zwi

This is by Richard Dawkins


Gaps in the Mind - we are African apes

"But it is we that choose to divide animals up into discontinuous species. On the evolutionary view of life there must have been intermediates, even though, conveniently for our naming rituals, they are usually extinct"

"We admit that we are like apes, but we seldom realise that we are apes. Our common ancestor with the chimpanzees and gorillas is much more recent than their common ancestor with the Asian apes--the gibbons and orangutans. There is no natural category that includes chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans but excludes humans."

"Molecular evidence suggests that our common ancestor with chimpanzees lived, in Africa, between five and seven million years ago, say half a million generations ago. This is not long by evolutionary standards. ... in your left hand you hold the right hand of your mother. In turn she holds the hand of her mother, your grandmother. Your grandmother holds her mother's hand, and so on. ... How far do we have to go until we reach our common ancestor with the chimpanzees? It is a surprisingly short way. Allowing one yard per person, we arrive at the ancestor we share with chimpanzees in under 300 miles."


Here is a link

http://www.world-of-dawkins.com/Catalano/quotes.htm

Zwi

Oh and by the way, gorilla gorilla gorilla is strictly correct

Valentine Pontifex

Are humans apes?

It really depends on what philosophy of classification one uses.

If one uses cladistic classification than we are apes since we are descended from the common ancestors of all apes.

If one uses traditional classification than it depends on whether or not one considers humans in some way different enough to warrant using two or more taxa. Those who go by traditional classification do not usually classify humans as apes.

Most biologists, particularily specialists, use the former and not the latter.

The same issues come up with dinosaurs and birds. In cladistic classification the dinosaurs are not extinct if one accepts the prevailing and well-supported notion that birds are descended from dinosaurs. This is why the phrase "non-avian dinosaurs" is sometimes is used to refer to what have traditionally called dinosaurs. That actually shows a disadvantage to cladistic classification. Its advantage though is being more biologically meaningful than traditional classification.

Also Gorilla gorilla gorilla is allowed if one refers to the named subspecies of gorillas and not the species. That subspecies name is being used in science can be verified by the following journal search.

Bumble Bee Tuna

Maybe you guys aren't actually ugly human beings...
Maybe you're just good looking apes, with exceptional verbal skills!
Just think about it. Kids hate ugly people! Oh but they'd love a talking monkey!
See, it's not so bad.
All material shamelessly hiijacked from the UCB

-B

Non-praying Mantis

Non-praying Mantis:
Sorry to rain on your parade again, Zwi, but:

zwi:
It is incorrect to state that humans are descended from great apes

Non-praying Mantis:
The above statment is incorrect, because if...

Zwi:
Humans are African Apes The other living African Apes are pnpaniscus, pan troglodites and Gorilla gorilla gorilla[sic]
Asian apes are a distant relative

Actually zwi, what I was trying to say was this: Humans are apes, and our ancestors, which we share with the great apes, were probably also apes. Your statement said "it is incorrect to state that humans are descended from great apes," which, given that both humans, and our ancestors, are/were apes, was wrong.

The "sic" was refering to the whole statement "Humans are African Apes The other living African Apes are pnpaniscus, pan troglodites and Gorilla gorilla gorilla," not just the Gorilla gorilla gorilla, part, but mostly the "pnpaniscus" part. My apologies for not placing the "sic" accurately.

NPM