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

[cake_crumb]

"There is absolutely NO RELATION between a chimp and a human!If one were to have evolved from the other then we would be EITHER all chimps or all human."

FIRST of all, humans did NOT evolve from chimps.

SECOND, even if one HAD somehow evolved from the other (which we DIDN'T) we would be humans and chimps. Each their own species. If we were either ALL human or ALL chimp, NEITHER species could have either 'evolved' or even devolved from the other.

[OREALLY]

When science can disprove the existence of God I'll think about !

[Hodar]

So, I guess dogs did not evolve from wolves? Cats from larger felines?

The fossil record says you are wrong.

[cake_crumb]

My initial reaction was a knee jerk from the headline without having read the article...a rare mistake but one I HAVE to break myself of.

As for your analogies, every one is a result of human interferance. I'm not dissing the intelligence of chimps, but they didn't develop sign language or smoking habits on their own. Of COURSE they can learn. My POINT was they didn't learn this stuff from each other.

A wild chimp's only tool-using skill is to fish for insects with sticks.

[hgro]

Chimps Now to be Considered Humans

Does this include dimocrats'

[F.J. Mitchell]

Next thing we know, You'll be telling us the earth ain't flat neither- Don't even go there! If it were a globe, a ship would go towards Antartica at the speed of sound, and nothing could provide the power to propell it northward agin.

[EBUCK]

I'm not bitching about the reclass....I'm just point out that the motive behind the reclass is not entirely scientific.

[Aric2000]

Science doesn't try to disprove the existence of god, so how would it prove it or disprove it?

It never asks the question, the existence or nonexistence of god is a matter of faith, not science.

[OREALLY]

P.S. My faith is strong enough to withstand the theories of mere mortals. Man was created in God's image not a monkey.
Good bye.

[Aric2000]

LOL. I like it....

[EBUCK]

When science can disprove the existence of God I'll think about !

I'd be more interested in seeing scientific proof of the existence of God than another inquisition to disprove sumthin.

[Major_Risktaker]

To Mr. hgro

"Chimps Now to be Considered Humans.

"Does this include dimocrats"

I GUESS SO!

[HairOfTheDog]

P.S. My faith is strong enough to withstand the theories of mere mortals. Man was created in God's image not a monkey. Good bye.

Perhaps these are distinctions that are not all that important to God.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Here's a picture of my cousin:

He knows how to pick his hotties!

[Aric2000]

Well, let's see, a monkey has 2 arms, 2 legs, a head, a trunk.

The image is about the same actually, so god must have been a monkey.

Sorry, just couldn't help myself.

Just trying to live up to your expectations.

[EBUCK]

Yah....funnier than say "Ladies and Gentlemen, the former Chimp, er, um, President of the United States (roar of somewhat monkey like applause)"

[ALS]

Those flat earthers and center of the universe types were "scientists".

Some things never change.

[Liberal Classic]

PETA is going to love this until they realize that chimpanzees hunt monkeys for food.

[Brian Allen]

Chimps Belong on Human Branch of Family Tree, Study Says

John Pickrell in England
for National Geographic News
May 20, 2003

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.

Now, biologists at Wayne State University School of Medicine in Detroit, Michigan, provide new genetic evidence that lineages of chimps (currently Pan troglodytes) and humans (Homo sapiens) diverged so recently that chimps should be reclassed as Homo troglodytes. The move would make chimps full members of our genus Homo, along with Neandertals, and all other human-like fossil species. "We humans appear as only slightly remodeled chimpanzee-like apes," says the study.

"The loss of the [wild] chimp and gorilla seems imminent," said Morris Goodman, a study co-author. "Moving chimps into the human genus might help us to realize our very great likeness, and therefore treasure more and treat humanely our closest relative," he said.

However, experts say many scientists are likely to resist the reclassification, especially in the emotionally-charged and often disputed field of anthropology.

Knowing Me, Knowing You

The term genus describes a very closely related group of similar species, thought to have diverged from one another relatively recently, and is the first grouping above the species level. Common chimpanzees and bonobos have until now been classified into their own genus, Pan.

Historical classification schemes, based on physical similarities such as bones, argued that chimps and gorillas where each other's closest relatives, and that both where closely related to orangutans to the exclusion of humans.

However, with the advent of molecular techniques to compare similarities in our DNA starting in the 1960s, most experts have come to accept the fact that humans and chimps are most closely related. Studies indicate that humans and chimps are between 95 and 98.5 percent genetically identical.

Derek E. Wildman, Goodman, and other co-authors at Wayne State argue in their new study, published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that given the evidence, it's somewhat surprising that humans and chimps are still classified into different genera. Other mammalian genera often contain groups of species that diverged much earlier than chimps and humans did, said Goodman. "To be consistent, we need to revise our definition of the human branch of the tree of life," he said.

Historically Flawed

Goodman and colleagues used computer methods to analyze the amount of similarity between 97 important human and chimp genes and as many of the same gene sequences as are currently available for less-studied gorillas, orangutans, and Old World monkeys.

The results suggested that within important sequence stretches of these functionally significant genes, humans and chimps share 99.4 percent identity. (Some previous DNA work remains controversial. It concentrated on genetic sequences that are not parts of genes and are less functionally important, said Goodman.)

Using the DNA data, the researchers argue that humans and chimp lineages evolutionarily diverged from one another between five and six million years ago. Many other genera more distant to people, some squirrels for example, include groups of species that have diverged from one another far earlier?many between 7 to 11 million years ago. Species groupings should be equivalent between different groups of animals, said Goodman. "An objective yardstick is the age of origin of a branch [of animals]," he said.

"Historically, the philosophy behind how we group organisms was flawed," said Goodman. Starting with Aristotle in ancient Greece, species have been grouped according to their "degree of perfection," with man as the pinnacle. This "anthropocentric," or human-centered, view led to "exaggeration of the differences between humans and their relatives," he said, noting that his study gives "an objective view of man's place in the kingdom of life."

Confusion and Opposition

"This is an attempt to pull the classification of humans in line with other species?and is fundamentally a good idea if you want to accurately reflect the evolutionary differences between organisms," said Cristophe Soligo of the Human Origins research group at The Natural History Museum in London, England. Humans have been the "odd-one out" in terms of mammalian classification, he said.

"However, whenever there is a big change in [classification] practice, it also leads to a lot of confusion and opposition," said Soligo. "The closer you get to humans the more contentious the issues become."

Reclassifying chimps would also have "political implications," challenging our long-held view of the boundary between humans and other animals, he said. Many recent studies "are contributing to blurring the boundaries between our species", said Soligo.

"The argument is whether genetic relatedness is the only thing you should take into account," said anthropologist Bernard Wood at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. "A genus should also be a group of very similar species, that share attributes such as behavior and [mode of movement]," he said.

Fossil human-like species are currently divided into at least three genera. Grouping them all in the genus Homo could be very confusing, Wood said. Classification schemes "should be the signposts for differences between organisms," said Wood. "The problem is, if you call the chimp Homo troglodytes, you deny yourself that tool to help guide you though the tree of life."

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

We are playing in the monkey bars
Sittin' by the streets just countin' the cars
We are running from place to place
We're running around, like we're in a rat race

Monkey bars, swingin' stars
Countin' the cars, by the monkey bars

We've got a job in the Amazon
Everyone's a jungle, out to con
We drive for miles and see lots of trees
We get home in time to pay our managers fees

Monkey bars, swingin' stars
Countin' the cars, by the monkey bars

(Solo)

Eatin's easy when you're chimps like us
Banana splits are a definite plus
Things'll be better when we climb our way out
Our hands may slip, but not cause of doubt

Monkey bars, swingin' stars
Countin' the cars, by the monkey bars

Monkey bars, swingin' stars
Settin' up those pars by the monkey bars