Are humans related to apes?

[Zzyzx]

.
Are humans related to apes?

Geneticists (people who study such things) tell us that H. sapiens have great genetic similarity to members of the taxonomic group Family: Hominidae (great apes).

This seems to offend some people or to contradict their religious beliefs.

On what basis can argument be made that the classification is in error?

[SallyF]

Are humans related to apes?

Geneticists (people who study such things) tell us that H. sapiens have great genetic similarity to members of the taxonomic group Family: Hominidae (great apes).

Yes, human are genetically very similar to apes.

Genetically, we arent that different from bananas, so do what you want with that information.

On what basis can argument be made that the classification is in error?

It would depend on what classification system we are using. Genetics are one way to classify living creatures. There are others. Certainly humans stand apart from all other surviving species in many important ways.

One of the important ways humans stand apart from all other surviving species is our ability to imagine that we are miniature replicas of a god ...

And to imagine that facts are attacking our beliefs ...!

[1213]

Are humans related to apes?
Geneticists (people who study such things) tell us that H. sapiens have great genetic similarity to members of the taxonomic group Family: Hominidae (great apes).

On what basis can argument be made that the classification is in error?

If you feel that you are related to apes, I have no reason to argue against the feeling. But similarity is not a proof for relation, because there can be many reasons for the similarity.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 12 by 1213]

Thank you for providing a religious perspective on these matters.

Are humans related to apes?
Geneticists (people who study such things) tell us that H. sapiens have great genetic similarity to members of the taxonomic group Family: Hominidae (great apes).

On what basis can argument be made that the classification is in error?

If you feel that you are related to apes, I have no reason to argue against the feeling.

Geneticists provide evidence that YOU are related to apes " provided that you are H. sapiens sapiens. Care to argue against genetics (not feelings)?



Notice the bold red question above. Care to take a stab at addressing that question?

[Willum]

Are humans related to apes?
Geneticists (people who study such things) tell us that H. sapiens have great genetic similarity to members of the taxonomic group Family: Hominidae (great apes).

On what basis can argument be made that the classification is in error?

If you feel that you are related to apes, I have no reason to argue against the feeling. But similarity is not a proof for relation, because there can be many reasons for the similarity.

Likewise, if you feel you are related to mud, no one can argue against that feeling, because your feelings are your own. However, if I were to go to a psychotherapist and tell them that, I know what would happen to me.

[William]

[Replying to post 14]

Willum: Likewise, if you feel you are related to mud, no one can argue against that feeling, because your feelings are your own. However, if I were to go to a psychotherapist and tell them that, I know what would happen to me.

William: Do we have a prophet in our midst?

If I were the psychotherapist, I would tell you that according to the science, we can trace our biology even further back than the mud.



[center][/center]

[Willum]

[Replying to William]

Mud is composed of Silicates, dear.
There is less difference between fish and apes than there is between carbon and silicon.
But you go right on being clever.
1213s forefathers, what 6000 BCE, were mud and from mud. No wonder there is a mental health crisis.

[Menotu]

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Lack of understanding. Ignorance (willful or otherwise). The need to not be 'wrong' about their beliefs.
The list is long.
If you're looking for scientific data you're best served to look elsewhere as religion doesn't like science (unless it can use science to its benefit) IMO

[William]

[Replying to post 16]

Willum: Mud is composed of Silicates, dear.
There is less difference between fish and apes than there is between carbon and silicon.
But you go right on being clever.

William: You seemed to miss the reference to the 'trace even further back' dearest stardust.
In that, you also appear to have skirted around the point made. Such as is, your own use of the device of "cleverness".

Willum: 1213s forefathers, what 6000 BCE, were mud and from mud. No wonder there is a mental health crisis.

William: Perhaps a good scrub-up of that carbon upon the pot, will make it gleam as the kettle?

I fail to see how your judgmental opinion of anyone's mental health, is relevant Willum.

I suppose you believe yourself 'sane' as a consequence?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 18 by William]

No idea what you are talking about.
It would take nuclear forces to change silicon to carbon. A very silly thing for even an omnipotent god to do.

But one life form preceding from another happens every day.

The belief that anything would form life that way should tend to make people think their rational processes are lacking.

Now to say that life arose from life makes sense.

It is funny how theists claim that non-theists say: Life came from non-life, when their god has no life-like characteristics, nor is clay animated.

It is also claimed by non-theists that simple life came from complicated chemicals, and more and more sophisticated life evolved.

You see, in the non-magical world, complicated things are built slowly, but reproduced well.
In the magic world, stuff just happens.

[EarthScienceguy]

Apes have 48 chromosomes and humans only have 46. That is a problem. The only possible solution to this dilemma is a make believe that mammals can fuse chromosomes telomere to telomere which is unheard of in mammals.

Anatomically humans are much more like orangutans than chimps. Evolutionist lose on both ways in which organisms are classified.