Chimps Belong on Human Branch of Family Tree, Study Says

GiantRaven

New member
Dec 5, 2010
2,423
0
0
Link. [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0520_030520_chimpanzees.html]

I, for one, welcome our new Chimp relatives.
 

Sirpipple

New member
Aug 17, 2010
104
0
0
Objection! I don't think the change should be made because change is scary and scary is bad. or so I'm told
 

floppylobster

New member
Oct 22, 2008
1,528
0
0
GiantRaven said:
Link. [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0520_030520_chimpanzees.html]
Ah, the missing link [http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0520_030520_chimpanzees.html]!

Ah ha ha ha. Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

I certainly hope they're not too embarrassed to have us as close relatives and they still invite us over for tea.
 

Valagetti

Good Coffee, cheaper than prozac
Aug 20, 2010
1,112
0
0
Am I reading this wrong but was this posted in 2003? And this is old news anyway, irrelevant to the time stamp...
 

GiantRaven

New member
Dec 5, 2010
2,423
0
0
Valagetti said:
Am I reading this wrong but was this posted in 2003? And this is old news anyway, irrelevant to the time stamp...
Clearly I am completely blind. >_<
 

Fanitullen

New member
Nov 7, 2008
36
0
0
You know how the astronomers decided to reclassify Pluto, so that it was no longer a planet? You know the uproar that caused?

I'm guessing the biologists looked at that incident and thought, "I want to be yelled at by angry people like that!"
 

GiantRaven

New member
Dec 5, 2010
2,423
0
0
Fanitullen said:
You know how the astronomers decided to reclassify Pluto, so that it was no longer a planet? You know the uproar that caused?

I'm guessing the biologists looked at that incident and thought, "I want to be yelled at by angry people like that!"
I don't know, removing Pluto's status as a planet was a clear loss, but gaining a fuckton of Chimp relatives is a clear gain in my eyes.
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
Like Heiraxes are related to elephants, etc. etc? We are so far removed from chimps that our common ancestors doubtfully looked like either of us even at a glance. And other than the obvious primate features of socketed arms and oposeable thumbs and lack of tail, we have very little similarity to our "cousins" unless you squint really really hard. We're not talking a dogs and wolves difference here, we're talking a hummingbirds and ostriches difference. You can say there's a relation, but you can't just up and say "oh hey they look vaguely the same in silhouette, so let's call 'em cousins!" And before you flame, I'm not battling evolution here, only a stupid attempt at looking smart while really only looking pretentious.
 

docSpitfire

New member
Jun 13, 2011
110
0
0
Valagetti said:
Am I reading this wrong but was this posted in 2003? And this is old news anyway, irrelevant to the time stamp...
I was gonna say... my biology teacher was trying to tell me that they believe humans, bonobos and chimps to be subspecies of each other (i.e. drastically different versions of the same species like dogs and wolves are)

Of course proving that would require a chimp and a human to have fertile offspring so I guess that's not likely to be a verifiable study...

anyway... he was saying that back in 2005 so this seems like a step back from that.