Are humans apes?

[Dries van Tonder]

She claims we're primates, not apes.

She's right

[Xamonas Chegwé]

She claims we're primates, not apes.

She's right

No! That's wrong! We're not primates. We're mammals. Err... no. We're vertebrates! Err... Animals!

Fuck it - we are all of those. What subject is your tutor teaching you, lozzer. I do hope it's not biology!

Here - this is from WIKIPEDIA! So it must be FACT!

Under the current classification system there are two families of hominoids:
the family Hylobatidae consists of 4 genera and 14 species of gibbon, including the Lar Gibbon and the Siamang, collectively known as the lesser apes.
the family Hominidae consisting of chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans[1][2] collectively known as the great apes.
A few other primates, such as the Barbary Ape, have the word ape in their common names (usually to indicate lack of a tail), but they are not regarded as true apes.

[Dries van Tonder]

She claims we're primates, not apes.

She's right

No! That's wrong! We're not primates. We're mammals. Err... no. We're vertebrates! Err... Animals!

Fuck it - we are all of those. What subject is your tutor teaching you, lozzer. I do hope it's not biology!

Here - this is from WIKIPEDIA! So it must be FACT!

Under the current classification system there are two families of hominoids:
the family Hylobatidae consists of 4 genera and 14 species of gibbon, including the Lar Gibbon and the Siamang, collectively known as the lesser apes.
the family Hominidae consisting of chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans[1][2] collectively known as the great apes.
A few other primates, such as the Barbary Ape, have the word ape in their common names (usually to indicate lack of a tail), but they are not regarded as true apes.

Advanced bacteria?????

[Lozzer]

She claims we're primates, not apes.

She's right

No! That's wrong! We're not primates. We're mammals. Err... no. We're vertebrates! Err... Animals!

Fuck it - we are all of those. What subject is your tutor teaching you, lozzer. I do hope it's not biology!

Here - this is from WIKIPEDIA! So it must be FACT!

Under the current classification system there are two families of hominoids:
the family Hylobatidae consists of 4 genera and 14 species of gibbon, including the Lar Gibbon and the Siamang, collectively known as the lesser apes.
the family Hominidae consisting of chimpanzees, gorillas, humans and orangutans[1][2] collectively known as the great apes.
A few other primates, such as the Barbary Ape, have the word ape in their common names (usually to indicate lack of a tail), but they are not regarded as true apes.

It's anthropology, but I knew I was right. I never had the guts to correct her, but she can be a bit ditsy, bless her

[hackenslash]

Humans and apes evolved from a single forebearer species.

No, there is no 'humans and apes' because humans are apes and, in fact, under cladistics, we are also monkeys, as are all primates.

We probably split off when two of our genes fused.

No. The fusion of chromosome 2 represents none of the difference between humans and our closest primate relatives. It expresses exactly the same as a fused single chromosome as it does as two separate chromosomes.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Humans and apes evolved from a single forebearer species.

No, there is no 'humans and apes' because humans are apes and, in fact, under cladistics, we are also monkeys, as are all primates.

Why put "no" there, then?

We probably split off when two of our genes fused.

No. The fusion of chromosome 2 represents none of the difference between humans and our closest primate relatives. It expresses exactly the same as a fused single chromosome as it does as two separate chromosomes.

Why put "no" there at all?

[hackenslash]

Why put "no" there, then?

Because the way you presented it, humans and apes are treated as separate when they are not.

Why put "no" there at all?

Because you were wrong. It's pretty straightforward.

[Kristie]

I think my Uncle is. His back is so hairy it's

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Why put "no" there, then?

Because the way you presented it, humans and apes are treated as separate when they are not.

Why put "no" there at all?

Because you were wrong. It's pretty straightforward.

The way you interpreted what I said couldn't possibily be wrong, of course.

And I'll wait here while you prove we didn't diverge from the apes at the time our genes fused. I guess you know exactly when we did and have that date handy.

[hackenslash]

Two things, we didn't diverge from the apes. This has not yet happened, nor will it, because we are apes, and will always remain so. Secondly, our genes didn't fuse, our number two chromosome is a fusion of two chromosomes present in other apes, and it expresses identically, so it accounts for zero percent of the difference between us and other primates, meaning that it can't be a point of divergence, because in order for it to be a point of divergence from apes (which hasn't and won't happen), it would have to account for some of the difference between us and other primates.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Okay, then.

[DRSB]

Two things, we didn't diverge from the apes. This has not yet happened, nor will it, because we are apes, and will always remain so. Secondly, our genes didn't fuse, our number two chromosome is a fusion of two chromosomes present in other apes, and it expresses identically, so it accounts for zero percent of the difference between us and other primates, meaning that it can't be a point of divergence, because in order for it to be a point of divergence from apes (which hasn't and won't happen), it would have to account for some of the difference between us and other primates.

Same thing Christopher Ryan says in "Sex at dawn": "We did not originate from apes, we ARE apes".

[Pensioner]

I love this Vid

[Horwood Beer-Master]

Yes.

[Chuck Jones]

Two things, we didn't diverge from the apes. This has not yet happened, nor will it, because we are apes, and will always remain so. Secondly, our genes didn't fuse, our number two chromosome is a fusion of two chromosomes present in other apes, and it expresses identically, so it accounts for zero percent of the difference between us and other primates, meaning that it can't be a point of divergence, because in order for it to be a point of divergence from apes (which hasn't and won't happen), it would have to account for some of the difference between us and other primates.

We did diverge from apes. We did it twice. Get your facts right.