Evolution from monkeys

[Blind groper]

It is quite common for anti-evolution religicos to accuse those who accept evolution of believing our ancestors were monkeys. It is also common for the evolutionist to argue that we did not evolve from monkeys, but from apes.

Let me set the matter straight. We evolved from both. Humans are apes, but apes evolved from monkeys. 30 million years ago, there were no apes, but there were plenty of primitive monkeys. 20 million years ago, there was Proconsul, which shared ape and monkey characterists - a transitional fossil. 10 million years ago, there were plenty of apes, and 200,000 years ago, one more ape evolved - Homo sapiens.

So, yes. We did evolve from monkeys, a couple of steps back in the evolutionary chain.

[pErvinalia]

No we evolved from fish.

[pErvinalia]

[Blind groper]

rEvo

You are correct.
And lancelets. And amphibians. And reptiles. And pond scum.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

It is quite common for anti-evolution religicos to accuse those who accept evolution of believing our ancestors were monkeys. It is also common for the evolutionist to argue that we did not evolve from monkeys, but from apes.

Let me set the matter straight. We evolved from both. Humans are apes, but apes evolved from monkeys. 30 million years ago, there were no apes, but there were plenty of primitive monkeys. 20 million years ago, there was Proconsul, which shared ape and monkey characterists - a transitional fossil. 10 million years ago, there were plenty of apes, and 200,000 years ago, one more ape evolved - Homo sapiens.

So, yes. We did evolve from monkeys, a couple of steps back in the evolutionary chain.

Proconsul was not a monkey. It is placed in superfamily Hominoidea (true apes) but, due to its monkey-like characteristics, this classification is disputed and it may belong outside of the Hominoidea but still in the Catarrhini parvorder (apes + old-world monkeys). Either way, it is not thought to be a direct ancestor of the apes, and hence Homo sapiens.

So, the current, scientific consensus is still that all primates share a common ancestor, apes and old-world monkeys share a more recent ancestor than new-world monkeys, but none of these three groups directly evolved from either of the others.

In other words, you're wrong.

[JimC]

Personally, I think we evolved from yeast, which explains our fondness for alcohol...

[mistermack]

Personally, I think we evolved from yeast, which explains our fondness for alcohol...

Actually, it would explain our fondness for sugar, not alcohol.

We seem to have lost a bit. It would be great, if we could eat lots of sweets, and piss alcohol.
Mind you, gin does taste a lot like piss, so maybe some people can?

[Blind groper]

To Xamonas

Apes evolved from monkeys. You could argue semantics and try to redefine the word 'monkey', but that would be an evasion.

Primate evolution included prosimians about 50 million years ago, which were similar to the Madagascar lemurs, which gave rise to monkeys. 30 million years ago, according to the fossil record, there were no apes, but plenty of monkeys. Then 20 million years ago we had Proconsul, which was an animal with both ape and monkey characteristics. Later, in the fossil record, we see fossils of pure apes, and then prehumans.

Monkeys before apes means apes evolved from monkeys.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

To Xamonas

Apes evolved from monkeys. You could argue semantics and try to redefine the word 'monkey', but that would be an evasion.

Primate evolution included prosimians about 50 million years ago, which were similar to the Madagascar lemurs, which gave rise to monkeys. 30 million years ago, according to the fossil record, there were no apes, but plenty of monkeys. Then 20 million years ago we had Proconsul, which was an animal with both ape and monkey characteristics. Later, in the fossil record, we see fossils of pure apes, and then prehumans.

Monkeys before apes means apes evolved from monkeys.

Monkeys are a paraphyletic group (ie. species that are all the descendants of a common ancestor but with the exclusion of other descendants of that same ancestor).

Taken individually, however, New-World Monkeys and Old-World Monkeys are both monophyletic groups (ie. they stem from a common ancestor and all descendants of that ancestor are included).

There was a split of early Simians (infraorder Simiiformes) into the Platyrrhini and Catarrhini parvorders about 40 myo. The former became the New-World Monkeys and their allies. The latter became the Old-World Monkeys, Apes and their allies.

Examples of New-World Monkeys, which all share a common, Platyrrhini ancestor, certainly predate Proconsul but are not direct ancestors due to Proconsul belonging to the other branch of Simiiformes.

The Old-World Monkeys are a far later branch of the Catarrhini parvorder and, once again, they share a common ancestor from that group. The earliest Old-World Monkey fossil is Victoriapithecus, which dates from the middle Miocene. By contrast, Proconsul dates from the early Miocene - several million years earlier! So no, it does not follow that monkeys before apes mean that apes evolved from apes - no more than ferns before antelopes means that antelopes evolved from ferns!

Old-World Monkeys and Apes share common Catarrhini ancestors up to a point but neither is the ancestor of the other - all earlier members of the parvorder predate such definitions.

[Pappa]

Personally, I think we evolved from yeast, which explains our fondness for alcohol...

Actually, it would explain our fondness for sugar, not alcohol.

Yeasts consume the alcohol once all the sugars are used up.

[Svartalf]

Alcohol being, after all, a complex sugar...

[mistermack]

Personally, I think we evolved from yeast, which explains our fondness for alcohol...

Actually, it would explain our fondness for sugar, not alcohol.

Yeasts consume the alcohol once all the sugars are used up.

Oh, right. I've never heard that. So it eats it's own shit. That's a handy trick. Or,maybe it's like a cow chewing the cud, eating it in two stages.
Whenever I've brewed beer or wine, the yeast falls to the bottom once the sugar has gone.

I suppose that's why they kill the yeast with sodium metabisulphite instead of just waiting for it die.

[Blind groper]

http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates ... imates.htm

To Xamonas

The reference above is a summary of primate evolution coming from the anthropology department of Palomar University. It very cleary and unambiguously states that apes evolved from monkeys early in the Miocene epoch.

Now, there is a major difference between new world and old world monkeys. Apes are descended from, and more closely related to old world monkeys, not new world.

The time line goes..
Prosimians
Primitive monkeys
Split into old world and new world monkeys
Old world monkeys giving rise to apes
Later apes
Hominids.

[mistermack]

http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates ... imates.htm

To Xamonas

The reference above is a summary of primate evolution coming from the anthropology department of Palomar University. It very cleary and unambiguously states that apes evolved from monkeys early in the Miocene epoch.

Now, there is a major difference between new world and old world monkeys. Apes are descended from, and more closely related to old world monkeys, not new world.

The time line goes..
Prosimians
Primitive monkeys
Split into old world and new world monkeys
Old world monkeys giving rise to apes
Later apes
Hominids.

It's a bit of a semantic question. Apes didn't evolve from modern monkeys. They evolved from the same ancestor as modern monkeys. You can call them monkeys if you like. It's just down to the definition that you use of a monkey.
It's similar to the situation that we humans are in. We have a common ancestor to modern apes.
Some people say we evolved from apes, others say that we ARE apes. Other experts class us as a subspecies of Chimpanzee.
We are what we are. You could turn it around, and say that apes evolved from humans. Because they evolved from human ancestors. It sounds crazy, but it's just as valid as the vice-versa in genetic terms.
Genetically, modern monkeys are no closer to the common ancestor than modern apes are.
So you can equally say that monkeys evolved from apes. Because they evolved from the ancestors of apes.

It's only because the common ancestor was physically more similar to modern monkeys, that we find it convenient to say that apes evolved from monkeys. Genetically, the ancestors were just as much ape as monkey.

[Blind groper]

Mistermack

No, you cannot say apes evolved from humans, because all apes except humans evolved from earlier, more primitive apes, not humans.

Xamonas is creating an argument based on the fact that there is a lack of old world monkey fossils before the Miocene. That lack is real, but does not mean there were no old world monkeys before the Miocene. Genetic studies give an estimate of when old world monkeys and new world monkeys split their lineages. And that split was well before the Miocene.

Apes have strong genetic similarities to old world monkeys, and much weaker similarities to new world monkeys. In addition, the first intermediate old world monkey/ape fossil was early Miocene. The genetic evidence implies very strongly that apes descended from old world monkeys. If they had descended from a common ancestor of all monkeys, then they would be genetically equally closely related to new world monkeys, which they are not.