Poll: Do you believe humans are apes?

[Contextualizer]

How is this a question of belief?

"Ape" is a scientific term that is clearly defined. As per those definitions, humans are clearly apes.

This thread is ridiculous.

 

[RN7]

Technically, yes I do believe that. Evolution's not bullshit, at least in my opinion.

 

[Bocaj2000]

snip

Wait... I'm quite sure that there are more Islamic people in to world than Christians. How accurate is that chart?

Christianity actually has more people than Islam.
Strange, I know, but according to my Human Geography class it's true.

Huh... I learned something new today.

As for the OT: Fuckin magnets, how do they work?

 

[Seydaman]

Scientifically speaking humans are apes. Actually we are members of a group of apes known as the "Great Apes"

You just answered the question
There's no believing when it comes to science
It's fact so there's no arguing it
People are so stupid...

 

[Seydaman]

Technically, yes I do believe that. Evolution's not bullshit, at least in my opinion.

It's fact, fuck how do people still not get this?
You can't not "believe" in fact
That's like saying you don't believe in gravity, but being dead serious.
Anyone who knows anything would think you a fool.

 

[The Austin]

snip

Wait... I'm quite sure that there are more Islamic people in to world than Christians. How accurate is that chart?

Christianity actually has more people than Islam.
Strange, I know, but according to my Human Geography class it's true.

Huh... I learned something new today.

As for the OT: Fuckin magnets, how do they work?

Well, you see, one side of the magnet attracts ions that contain a positive charge. These "charges" center at the poles, which....... Oh.... I see what you did there.

 

[thom_cat_]

I think I'm going to take this as "did we have ape-like ancestors" so I'm voting yes...
but really, we are no longer apes.

 

[Twad]

just ask the flying spagetti monster

 

[Calatar]

Science doesn't determine what is an ape. Defining 'ape' is what determines what is an ape, and that's not science.

Anyhoo, I've always considered the human race to be a sort of one of a kind species that is one step ABOVE apes. We sort of should have our own category.

"This is the category for organisms which put themselves in charge of categorizing life. We put ourselves higher than the other categories because we're the ones making the chart."

Firstly, nomenclature is a part of science. A big part. That's like saying "Defining 'Coulombs' is what determines how much charge there is in 20 Coulombs of charge, and that's not science." Scientists agree on a use for words, and that is indeed part of science.

There is no "above" in biological terms. There's no food chain (it's a food WEB), there's really no good criteria for ordering species like that. Humans are not "superior" to all other species. Of course we're a one of a kind species. All species are.
(Unless of course you literally mean "ONE of a kind," in which case that species is screwed if it can't reproduce asexually)

The evolutionary tree isn't about being top dog, it's about time and genetic branching. If we were at the top, we would be protocells responsible for being the ancestors of all ensuing life. If we were one category above apes, it would mean we evolved before any other ape evolved into existence. But since we are descendants of apes, that obviously cannot be so.

ITT: People clinging to the concept of human superiority as a justification for how humans being apes is "just, like, your opinion, dude."

 

[zehydra]

Science doesn't determine what is an ape. Defining 'ape' is what determines what is an ape, and that's not science.

Anyhoo, I've always considered the human race to be a sort of one of a kind species that is one step ABOVE apes. We sort of should have our own category.

"This is the category for organisms which put themselves in charge of categorizing life. We put ourselves higher than the other categories because we're the ones making the chart."

Firstly, nomenclature is a part of science. A big part. That's like saying "Defining 'Coulombs' is what determines how much charge there is in 20 Coulombs of charge, and that's not science." Scientists agree on a use for words, and that is indeed part of science.

There is no "above" in biological terms. There's no food chain (it's a food WEB), there's really no good criteria for ordering species like that. Humans are not "superior" to all other species. Of course we're a one of a kind species. All species are.
(Unless of course you literally mean "ONE of a kind," in which case that species is screwed if it can't reproduce asexually)

The evolutionary tree isn't about being top dog, it's about time and genetic branching. If we were at the top, we would be protocells responsible for being the ancestors of all ensuing life. If we were one category above apes, it would mean we evolved before any other ape evolved into existence. But since we are descendants of apes, that obviously cannot be so.

ITT: People clinging to the concept of human superiority as a justification for how humans being apes is "just, like, your opinion, dude."

The only notion of superiority I'm talking about is our intelligence level, which is what enables us to survive. I would consider this difference in intelligence to be large enough to distinguish us from apes. (Apart from this, it also seems that there is a much greater variety in appearance between humans than there is in individual ape species)

 

[zehydra]

Technically, yes I do believe that. Evolution's not bullshit, at least in my opinion.

It's fact, fuck how do people still not get this?
You can't not "believe" in fact
That's like saying you don't believe in gravity, but being dead serious.
Anyone who knows anything would think you a fool.

What people think of you should never be the basis of belief.

 

[zehydra]

Question: What is a fact?

 

[Calatar]

As for the OT: Fuckin magnets, how do they work?

Well, you see, one side of the magnet attracts ions that contain a positive charge. These "charges" center at the poles, which....... Oh.... I see what you did there.

Sorry, but I couldn't help but address this.

Magnetic attraction is different than electric attraction. A polarized side of a magnet can attract and repel both positive and negative ions depending on the direction of their velocity vector relative to the magnetic field lines circling the magnet. Magnets aren't polarized by charge imbalance in the magnet. Common permanent magnets are usually electrically neutral.

Just fyi. (I've had similar misconceptions about electric vs magnetic forces before I took EM physics, just letting you know that you're not quite on the right track.)

 

[Knight Templar]

I refuse to believe in incomplete facts.

Then you must belive in nothing, because evolution is better supported than gravity and all things can be wrong. Furthermore, where did you get that 30% figure? It's rather well know that there is 98% similarity between chimpanzees and humans. But if you can think of an objective classification system to replace the existing one by all means, go forth and earn your nobel prize.

We are apes in the way a duck is a bird, morality doesn't matter to systems of classification. "Morality" can be found in evolution, but that's another topic.

The impression I'm getting here is that you have no problem with taxonomy or evolution, but the implications thereof.

 

[newfiegirl 110]

There are just too many similarities between apes and man for us to ignore the connection, Religion may want us to believe one particular story, but we are also gifted with the intelligence to rationalize the facts placed before us.

 

[Nautical Honors Society]

How is this a question of belief?

"Ape" is a scientific term that is clearly defined. As per those definitions, humans are clearly apes.

This thread is ridiculous.

Not really, the reason I use "belief" is because it is a fact. When people disregard a fact and support something else, it is faith therefore a "belief". That is why it is in the question.

 

[The Austin]

As for the OT: Fuckin magnets, how do they work?

Well, you see, one side of the magnet attracts ions that contain a positive charge. These "charges" center at the poles, which....... Oh.... I see what you did there.

Sorry, but I couldn't help but address this.

Magnetic attraction is different than electric attraction. A polarized side of a magnet can attract and repel both positive and negative ions depending on the direction of their velocity vector relative to the magnetic field lines circling the magnet. Magnets aren't polarized by charge imbalance in the magnet. Common permanent magnets are usually electrically neutral.

Just fyi. (I've had similar misconceptions about electric vs magnetic forces before I took EM physics, just letting you know that you're not quite on the right track.)

Oh. Well, I guess that I learned something today.

GO SCIENCE!

 

[demoman_chaos]

Yes we are apes, just we traded in large amounts of body hair (at least most people did) and muscle for more brain power (some more than others).

 

[Calatar]

The only notion of superiority I'm talking about is our intelligence level, which is what enables us to survive. I would consider this difference in intelligence to be large enough to distinguish us from apes. (Apart from this, it also seems that there is a much greater variety in appearance between humans than there is in individual ape species)

Being a human, you're more trained to notice differences between humans than you are of differences between other apes. The idea that differing appearances is unique to the human species among apes is a human-centric perspective. Unless you're referring to skin color, which is so different because of our geographic range and sun exposure.

Many other apes are quite intelligent relative to other animals, and without a doubt their cleverness helps them to survive. This intelligence is a group characteristic of all the great apes. Just because one species has a feature which is more pronounced than the other species it shares an close ancestor with does not mean it gets to leave the taxonomic family. Keep in mind that 50,000 years ago we had nowhere near the same degree of knowledge, development, and civilization we have today, yet we are that same species. In evolutionary terms, 50,000 years is a drop in the bucket.

I recommend you watch this TED video. Essentially it proposes that the advancements of the human race are not due so much to biology as our culture.

We know that many of our great ape brethren are capable of learning human culture, vocabulary (and the underlying understanding of it), and have reasoning and thinking skills which can be compared to kindergarten level for humans. We don't know how long it would take them to reach the same level of intelligence that we currently have, but I don't think some of their intelligences are that far behind. If humans died out (as they almost did) perhaps another species of ape would have had the technological renaissance we experienced.