aerojockey: I always liked the creationist logic.Me: "What's so bad about being descended from apes? How do you know that wasn't God's plan?"Creationist: "Because being descended from apes deprecates the value of human life; they are making us out to be animals. That's why I believe in the story of Genesis literally."Me: "But in Genesis, God said, 'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return'. Does it really deprecate human life more to be descended from apes than it does to be descended from dust?"Creationist: "...."But seriously, setting aside the religion chat, this is a pretty cool story. Mammal relationships has really been a sticky point for a long time and this isn't going to make it any better. More accurate, but also more sticky, since it refutes a lot of common knowledge.
Old enough to know better: Humans, and every other mammal species. Duh.
Mentat: Ned Stark: Semantic? You're the one playing word games to avoid uncomfortable truths.New world monkeys split off long before there was any division at all between old world monkeys and apes. If they are monkeys, and old world monkeys are monkeys but apes are not monkeys, then the group monkeys is polyphyletic. Two seperate branches on the tree of life that never touch but are inexplicably the same thing. Its nonsensical.What's next? Humans aren't mammals but share a common ancestor with mammals?==A monkey is a primate of the Haplorrhini suborder and simian infraorder, either an Old World monkey or a New World monkey, but excluding apes and humans. There are about 260 known living species of monkey. Many are arboreal, although there are species that live primarily on the ground, such as baboons. Monkeys are generally considered to be intelligent. Unlike apes, monkeys usually have tails. Tailless monkeys may be called "apes", incorrectly according to modern usage; thus the tailless Barbary macaque is called the "Barbary ape". The New World monkeys (superfamily Ceboidea) are classified within the parvorder of Platyrrhini, whereas the Old World monkeys (superfamily Cercopithecoidea) form part of the parvorder Catarrhini, which also includes the hominoids (apes, including humans). Thus, as Old World monkeys are more closely related to hominoids than they are to New World monkeys, the monkeys are not a unitary (monophyletic) group.
Uncontrolled_Jibe: Ned Stark: Jim_Callahan: Ned Stark: Mentat: Creationist: I did not come from a monkey!Scientist: No, you and monkeys share a common ancestor.Creationist: I'm not a monkey!Scientist: No, you're a subspecies of ape.Creationist: Do I look like a chimpanzee?Scientist: Well, yeah, just with less hair and longer legs.Creationist: I am not a monkey's uncle!Scientist: Look, I'm trying to explain this-Subby: Hey! We're descended from rats!Creationist: RARScientist: Goddamnit.Its really very simple[img51.imageshack.us image 560x525]Monkeys are a distinct branch of the tree, we're all primates, but apes/humans are hominoid branch and monkeys are Cercopithecoidea or Platyrrhini depending on whether they're old-world or new-world monkeys.So, no, we're not monkeys. We are apes, though.Old world monkeys and new world monkeys can't both be monkeys if apes are not also monkeys.Great, thanks to your semantic disagreement,. the whole Theory of Evolution is disproven, therefore the Garden of Eden must be real and President Romney must never fly the same plane as Vice President Palin. Thanks a lot
I saw this story at a competent science news source:
Family resemblance. The ancestor to all placental mammals was a tiny insect-eating creature that evolved soon after the mass extinctions that wiped out the dinosaurs. Although generally similar in appearance, the shrew-sized Ukhaatherium nessovi (inset), which lived alongside dinosaurs, wasn't a placental mammal.
Fuggin Bizzy: "Descended from?" "Evolved from?" Bullshiat, we are rats. We eat anything we lay our paws on, despoil everything around us, kill each other in large numbers for no reason whatsoever, and there are over 7 billion of us - constantly gnawing, biting, scratching, killing, infecting, and breeding. How are we not rats?
dehehn: Old enough to know better: Humans, and every other mammal species. Duh.Yeah and we were all reptiles before that, and fish before that and sea cucumbers before that and strands of RNA before that. The creationists have a lot of things to feel uncomfortable about descending from after apes.
SevenizGud: If the thought of descending from apes make creationists retch, wait until they hear that scientists now think humans descended from rats.Wait until they hear about number agreement.
KrispyKritter: keep pretending theories are facts, morans.
MrEricSir: But what species did God evolve from, that's the real question. So far I haven't found any creationists who've been able to answer that one.
namatad: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PikaiaPikaia is not impressed
Philbb: I guess it's nice to know which ancient rat we descended from, but I thought we already knew that all mammals came from some small rat-like creature that survived the dinosaur extinction event.
DesertDemonWY: If humans descended from apes and rats, why do we still have apes and rats?[www.gpb.org image 391x310]
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Feb 28 2017 03:55:16
Runtime: 0.336 sec (335 ms)