Chimps Now to be Considered Humans

National Geographic ^ | 5/19/2003 | kkindt

[kkindt]

A new report argues that chimpanzees are so closely related to humans that they should be included in our branch of the tree of life. Chimpanzees and other apes have historically been separated from humans in classification schemes, with humans deemed the only living members of the hominid family of species

[Aric2000]

Oh PUH lease....

Now it is on you to prove your supposition.

You talk a lot, but I have yet to see a fact come out of you.

I hear a creationist loon spouting off about something that he knows next to nothing about.

Keep going, your rants are rather amusing.

[jennyp]

"Is that why when I ask for ONE piece of scientifically verifiable evidence that proves that evolution is false, the creationists become VERY quiet, or do their best to misrepresent it to fit their silly notions?"

You've got the cart before the horse, sir. Theories don't have to be proven false, theories by definition are unproven suppositions. Until a theory is proven true, it remains an hypothesis, a guess. The onus is on you to prove your conjecture. Indeed, your very question is a ruse.

Nope. Theories get proven false all the time. What you cannot do is prove a theory true in a strict sense; the best you can do is 1) build a circumstantial case for it via several lines of evidence, and 2) prove all the serious competing theories false.

[Coleus]

Bye-Buy Darwin
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b2952e10307.htm
Refuting Darwinism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/821189/posts
The Dini-gration of Darwin
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/902550/posts
The Threat of Creationism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/844288/posts

[jennyp]

[Kenny Bunk:] Yo Junior, we share 90% of our DNA with watermelons. So does that mean we must invite chimps to our 4th of July picnic?

[TheCrusader:] That chimps have a 99% similar DNA to humans means nothing to the origin of man, especially when you consider that cats have a 90% similar DNA to humans.

LOL! OK you two, your homework for tonite is to read post 149. There'll be a quiz on this in the morning. :-)

[FITZ]

When do you think the leftist world of academia will declare unborn babies humans? After all, they share 100% of our genetic code.

They'll declare unborn babies as nothing but part of the mother's "tissue" even though it can be proven the baby has it's own DNA. DNA evidence is useful when you want to say humans are nothing more than some kind of animal that should have certain rights because of it ---but DNA cannot be used when it comes to the unborn humans.

[FITZ]

And we did not evolve from chimps, and science has NEVER claimed that to be the case. At some point in the past, the chimpanzees and we humans had a common ancestor, we evolved separately FROM that COMMON ANCESTOR.

Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes ---chimps and gorillas have 24 pairs. How many pairs of chromosomes did the "common ancestor" have? Was it 23 or 24 pairs? How do you "evolve" missing or added chromosomes ---that would happen all at one time. If a chimpanzee gives birth to a creature with 23 chromosomes, that offspring isn't going to be a well-formed chimpanzee able to survive well. Evolve would imply the genetic material changes little by little --not some big loss of two chromosomes at once but I don't see how they'd go away gene by gene.

[FITZ]

And I know all about gene translocations also --and I don't see that as any kind of explanation ---because the deformities causes by anything more than a small part are usually incompatible with life. Trisomies usually die before born, if they live they aren't likely to do well ---and to keep up a different number of chromosomes, the chimp with the missing set of chromosomes would have to breed with other chimps with 23 pairs ---to form humans. That seems like far too much chance that another exact kind of chromosome translocation happened at the same time.

[Bellflower]

"Furthermore, they can follow complex commands like, "go out into the hall, open the box, take out the red ball, and put it in the freezer."

My dog Silas understands complex commands,for example I can say in a very normal voice "Baby don't you think it's time for you to go to bed" and he turns around and goes into the bedroom, up on the bed and goes to sleep. Also he really enjoys counting up to 10. He takes deep pride in the fact that he is in charge of the kitties and makes sure they tow the line. I can talk to him in a normal voice about many things that he responds to in a way that says he understood me. Don't you think he should qaulify too?

[U S Army EOD]

Yeh, Where do sheep fit in??

[U S Army EOD]

Now that you mention it, he does monkey around a lot doesn't he??

[U S Army EOD]

My cat could talk to me. He had this sound that meant, "give me some of your beer".

[MattAMiller]

In the new scientific name, "Homo" (the genus name) means "man".

It's the definition of "genus" that's important here.

[U S Army EOD]

Remember chimps beat man into space.

[Brian Allen]

<< This is a nonsense. >>

Is this a nonsense?

Is the Pope Polish?

'Course its a nonsense!

Not the slightest doubt in my mind.

But then maybe we should let the Pantheists entertain themselves on their way to Hell? Let them have their puny fun?

After all we have watched and laughed for years as the entire KKKli'toon criminal gang struggled to KKKon-Vince itself -- and the world beyond Hot Springs and Peking -- that you could make strawberry jam oudda pigshit.

And that one never worked either.

And our recovery proceeds apace.

[ALS]

To: Aric2000

"Is that why when I ask for ONE piece of scientifically verifiable evidence that proves that evolution is false, the creationists become VERY quiet, or do their best to misrepresent it to fit their silly notions?"

You've got the cart before the horse, sir. Theories don't have to be proven false, theories by definition are unproven suppositions. Until a theory is proven true, it remains an hypothesis, a guess. The onus is on you to prove your conjecture. Indeed, your very question is a ruse.


203 posted on 05/20/2003 10:22 PM CDT by TheCrusader


Ha! Boy you nailed that guy right on the head!
Unfortunately, you aren't the first on FR to do so. :)

[Junior]

Yo Junior, we share 90% of our DNA with watermelons.

And you can cite a source for this statement? I doubt it seriously because it ain't true.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

If the chimps get union jobs, the unions will make them members and demand that jobless chimps get benefits. The unions will also demand that the chimps get special education, since they are linguistically challenged.

[Junior]

The date of the Earth is derived from several radiological dating methods on the rocks which make it up; when those methods agree on a date (i.e., the date is double checked using other methods), then researchers can be confident they have a low-end reference point for the age of the Earth. The upper end can be determined from using the same methods on meteorites, which coalesced (and thus reset their isotopic clocks) from the debris that makes up the planets and moons. These dates are most definitely "scientifically determined."

Many of the folks on these threads would be really suprised by the methods researchers have developed over the decades to work out sticky problems such as dating objects. And they'd also be surprised at the lengths researchers go to to double check any findings they might get. Sometimes I get the impression the less scientifically literate on these threads think scientists get their information from divine revelation, or from pulling numbers out of thin air. The LSL fail to understand the checks and balances used by scientists.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

I wonder if the genetic codes of homosexuals is similar to that of chimps? Homo-troglodyte-stinky-winkus-sappoen. Homosexuals brag that they have a different genetic makeup. Chimps are not human because they do not produce humans. Homosexual activity also does not produce humans. [I know. I know. If a woman were to rape them....]

[Junior]

A chimp is to be included in the human species...

Genus, not species.