Evolution from monkeys

[Hermit]

It lacks lots of features that make a bear a bear. No where near equivalent to humans having all the same features which make a monkey a monkey.

Yes, I know. Still, Blind groper's post, as it stands, has, shall we say, a certain shortcoming. That's all I was pointing out.

And don't presume to know what I do or don not think. Although you did not bother asking, I'll tell you what I do think anyway: Ultimately, the only way to resolve the issue would be to resolve the heritage issue via DNA analysis. And yes, I know, it's kind of difficult - even impossible- to extract DNA from 30 million year old bones.

[Hermit]

Koalas are so goddamn cute Can you cuddle them? Would they let you? Or would they scratch you with those claws

They're likely to scratch and/or bite you if you don't know how to handle them. Also, they will piddle on you. Not at all house-trainable like a dog or a cat.

Koalas are rather docile. They evolved without any real natural predators. So they will let you cuddle them. Or, at least, they've no choice in the matter. What are they gonna do about it?

LOL. Have you ever tried to cuddle one?

[Animavore]

It lacks lots of features that make a bear a bear. No where near equivalent to humans having all the same features which make a monkey a monkey.

Yes, I know. Still, Blind groper's post, as it stands, has, shall we say, a certain shortcoming. That's all I was pointing out.

And don't presume to know what I do or don not think. Although you did not bother asking, I'll tell you what I do think anyway: Ultimately, the only way to resolve the issue would be to resolve the heritage issue via DNA analysis. And yes, I know, it's kind of difficult - even impossible- to extract DNA from 30 million year old bones.

DNA from current, extant species will do. You don't need ancient DNA to show common ancestry.
Anyway, you can work it out with logic. The common ancestor of New World monkeys and the group which split into Old World monkeys and apes must itself have been a monkey. They couldn't have evolved into monkeys independently.

[Animavore]

Here's a piece by Jerry Coyne (author of Why Evolution is True) on why we're apes, monkeys and, even, fish.

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com ... g-dawkins/

[tattuchu]

Koalas are so goddamn cute Can you cuddle them? Would they let you? Or would they scratch you with those claws

They're likely to scratch and/or bite you if you don't know how to handle them. Also, they will piddle on you. Not at all house-trainable like a dog or a cat.

Koalas are rather docile. They evolved without any real natural predators. So they will let you cuddle them. Or, at least, they've no choice in the matter. What are they gonna do about it?

LOL. Have you ever tried to cuddle one?

An animal that cute, you should be able to cuddle it

I read about some other kind of animal in Australia that's incredibly friendly to humans and loves being pet. I can't remember what it was, though.

[Animavore]

Koalas are so goddamn cute Can you cuddle them? Would they let you? Or would they scratch you with those claws

They're likely to scratch and/or bite you if you don't know how to handle them. Also, they will piddle on you. Not at all house-trainable like a dog or a cat.

Koalas are rather docile. They evolved without any real natural predators. So they will let you cuddle them. Or, at least, they've no choice in the matter. What are they gonna do about it?

LOL. Have you ever tried to cuddle one?

An animal that cute, you should be able to cuddle it

I read about some other kind of animal in Australia that's incredibly friendly to humans and loves being pet. I can't remember what it was, though.

Possibly a wombat?

[Animavore]

More good pieces on why apes are monkeys. It took me a while to find more on this. Googling "human monkey" didn't help at all. But when I googled "human monophylogeny" many articles appeared.
http://paoloviscardi.com/2011/04/21/ape ... l-with-it/
http://blog.michael-lawrence-wilson.com ... ng-monkey/

[tattuchu]

Found it. It's the quokka:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/0 ... 26133.html

[Animavore]

Ah, c'mon. You just made that animal up.

[tattuchu]

Ah, c'mon. You just made that animal up.

I know, right? I'd certainly never heard of it. Maybe it's a myth, like drop bears

[Hermit]

Drop bears are not a myth.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Anyway, you can work it out with logic. The common ancestor of New World monkeys and the group which split into Old World monkeys and apes must itself have been a monkey. They couldn't have evolved into monkeys independently.

That's very flawed logic. There are fundamental, skeletal differences between NWMs and OWMs. Just because they are both called monkeys has no bearing on anything. The vast majority of Simiiformes species are extinct and most of them have not been discovered in fossil records.


Compare tits. The birds, not the boobies - oh, hang on, they could be birds too - errr...

The Long-tailed Tit, Aegithalos caudatus, looks like a tit, behaves like a tit, communes with other tits and was once included in the Paridae (tit) family because of this. It is now not even in the same superfamily and is known to be more closely related to swallows and larks than to the other tits.

But it's still called a tit. So its common ancestor with blue tits must have been a tit too. Surely two groups of birds couldn't have evolved into tits independently?


By the way, this has now become a Paridae thread.

[Animavore]

The Long-tailed Tit, Aegithalos caudatus, looks like a tit, behaves like a tit, communes with other tits and was once included in the Paridae (tit) family because of this. It is now not even in the same superfamily and is known to be more closely related to swallows and larks than to the other tits.

But it's still called a tit. So its common ancestor with blue tits must have been a tit too. Surely two groups of birds couldn't have evolved into tits independently?

Obviously one isn't really a tit. But New World and Old World monkeys are both really monkeys.


So are apes and humans

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The Long-tailed Tit, Aegithalos caudatus, looks like a tit, behaves like a tit, communes with other tits and was once included in the Paridae (tit) family because of this. It is now not even in the same superfamily and is known to be more closely related to swallows and larks than to the other tits.

But it's still called a tit. So its common ancestor with blue tits must have been a tit too. Surely two groups of birds couldn't have evolved into tits independently?

Obviously one isn't really a tit. But New World and Old World monkeys are both really monkeys.


So are apes and humans

OWMs and NWMs are "really monkeys" because that is the definition of a monkey. And, currently, apes and humans (which are not separate from apes btw) are not, for exactly the same reason. The term "Monkey" has a definite zoological meaning but does not exist in modern cladistic taxonomy.

It really is nothing more than the fact that the two, distinct groups share part of the same name that is fuelling this debate. There is a definite, evolutionary and genetic divide between New-World Monkeys and Old-World Monkeys. It is not as large a gap as that between Koala Bears and Grizzly Bears, or Blue Tits and Long-Tailed Tits, but it exists. You believe that that gap should be plugged and that the term monkey should refer to a monophyletic clade. It is an onion I share - I agree that it should refer to Simiiformes in its entirety. But that is not accepted by the zoological community as a whole, so, until it is, the term is limited in scope and refers to a polyphyletic group.

At least you admit you are jumping the gun here. The taxonomic nomenclature changes that you advocate may be adopted and they may not be. Some new evidence may redraw the playing field completely and neither of us will be right in future. But, at the moment, what I am saying reflects the status quo and what you are saying reflects the viewpoint of a vocal minority within the zoological and evolutionary science communities. That really is all there is to it.

[Animavore]

Sure, but I have no problem going with the minority when I fully agree with them. That's if they even are the minority. I'm not sure where concensus is right now.