[Virginia-American]

The "classic" tree is clearly invalidated by the evidence. EG, it doesn't group us, chimps, and gorillas together, whereas every source I looked at did, like the PubMed I quoted above which described the evidence for it as "overwhelming".

The "classic" is based on morphology only, I imagine, so that the hairy apes are one group and we're another. But the DNA says something else entirely.

Thanks for pointing out my oversight; researching the last post was quite informative.

[StACase]

Thanks for the reply. I am much more skeptical than you when it comes to this stuff. I just "know" there's politics behind the "findings" after all, there is behind most everything. Data that doesn't point towards the target result is open to be revised, rejected, fudged or ignored. This most certainly went on with the EPA study of 2nd hand smoke. I'm sure Global Warming is another. Innate homosexuality another. It's a long list. How about Attention Deficit Disorder Syndrome? Do you buy into that one? Dan Rather and his minions are not limited to the newsroom you know. Academia has its share of liars, grandstanders, and phonies.