Human Evolution: Did We Come From Monkeys?

Science & Reason on Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/ScienceReason

AronRa reveals a controversial new taxonomy stating that humans and other apes not only evolved directly from monkeys, but that we are in fact still monkeys right now.

---
Subscribe to Science & Reason:
• http://www.YouTube.com/Best0fScience
• http://www.YouTube.com/ScienceMagazine
• http://www.YouTube.com/ScienceTV
• http://www.YouTube.com/FFreeThinker
---

Turns out we DID come from monkeys!

In an earlier video, AronRa listed many of the taxonomic traits identifying humans as primates. In another video, he also explained why we are more specifically classified as a species of apes. But he deliberately omitted an intermediate stage between those two apparent levels, because its one that evokes so much resistance it really requires separate discussion just for that one grade alone.

No-one argues whether were vertebrates or placental mammals, even though that also means were animals. The fact that were apes can now be verified just as easily. For a while, most people thought the word, ape referred only to extant non-human pongids also known as great apes. There was no consideration given to lesser apes, nor to any of the many ancient apes we kept finding fossils for. Mainstream science sources are just now starting to realize that the word, ape means a lot more than just chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans, and that it includes a few extinct hominids that are more humanoid than any of these.

So there was a problem with our old method of classification, and it had to be fixed. Over the last two hundred and fifty years, weve kept patching up the original seven-layer system by adding a suborder, infraorder, superfamily, subgenus, and so on - til we cant even tell how to rank the labels anymore. Thats when we figured out that there are no ranks! So we dropped the labels and found a new system, one that isnt so arbitrary. See, the problem with Linnaean taxonomy is that some of it is subjective. Its usually based on morphological similarity, and sometimes on opinion, and loathsome opinions at that. There's often no way to prove whether Linnaean classification was even correct because he didn't rely on the rigid sort of rules that phylogenetics does.

We used to say that men didnt evolve from apes, but that men and apes shared a common ancestor. Now we have a better understanding of what an ape is, and that our common ancestor actually would have been classified as such, and so should we be. This rule of monophyletic hierarchy should apply to everything including the race of cat-people from the science fiction comedy, Red Dwarf.

Creationists try to ridicule evolution through the implication that we came from monkeys, and those who know the difference are quick to point out that apes are not monkeys. For one thing, apes dont have tails. But theres more to it than that. For example, we can tell that a Barbary ape isnt really an ape, its a tailless monkey; the same way we can tell that a glass snake isnt really a snake; its a legless lizard. There are so many distinctions that even if we found a snake that had legs, (and we have) wed still know it was a snake.

But snakes are a subset of the order, Squamata; That means lizard. If snakes evolved from lizards, do they stop being lizards at the moment they become snakes? And when exactly is that moment? It turns out this is another confusing convention in Linnaean taxonomy which is corrected by cladistics. Paraphyletic groups shouldnt exist in phylogenetics, nor would systematic classification permit the emergence of new species to add another equivalent category. Instead existing branches split into successive subsets that are each monophyletic, sharing a common line of descent from which they can diverge but never detach. This means snakes will always be a subset of lizards and apes would still be monkeys.

• http://www.youtube.com/AronRa
• http://locolobo.org
• http://darwinwasright.homestead.com/UranFnMonkeyMate.html

---

All clips/images used in this video are either copyright-free or covered under "fair use" for nonprofit educational purposes (Title 17 § 107 of the USC).
.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Human
• Theory
• Of
• Evolution
• Turns
• Out
• Did
• We
• Come
• From
• Monkeys
• AronRa
• Natural
• Selection
• Made
• Easy
• Charles
• Darwin
• Humanoid
• Primates
• Apes
• Missing
• Links
• Transitional
• Forms
• Classification
• Taxonomy
• Common
• Ancestor
• Science
• Biology
• Creationism
• Creationists
• Intelligent
• Design
• ID

[BizambitD]

Evolution is a religion

[naweedatbein]

@waitandbleed1464 thats what i agree with to but the monkeys dont have to be humans but different types of humans

[naweedatbein]

@352outlaw gud one haha it must be there since muslims claim alot of stuff but im muslim btw

[uhokstupid]

@352outlaw whos to say "god" has eyes? and whos to say "god" is he? lol when people act the actually know. but NOONE knows.

[waitandbleed1464]

I belive we evolved over time, but not from monkeys....or their wouldnt be any monkeys they would be.....humans...

[RustyKungfu]

@dredonBIRDYbird also my mistake about the last part, im glad u see it dat way

[RustyKungfu]

@dredonBIRDYbird u know that most of the evidence of evolution doesnt contradict the existance of a God. btw i totally agree wiv u about everyones right to believe, but the point i was making is claimed to be the facts of evolution still contains many contradictions and uncertainties in important areas, and is therefore still a theory and cant be claimed to be fact. With all the complications of existance and matter, i dont understand why religion is such a no go area

[dredonBIRDYbird]

@RustyKungfu lol btw there is more evidence in evolution tha there is of a "god", and its quite okay to be an atheist, and its quite okay to be part of a religion and believe there is a man living in the sky but my point is i follow proof not beliefs...and i wasnt blaming this "god" the cause of starting wars, i was blaming religion the cause of alot of wars, theres a difference between god and religion, even i know that.

[RustyKungfu]

@dredonBIRDYbird hey mate. just wanna say that wen u say to base ur beliefs on facts, scientists themselves admit that the *theory* of evolution and the big bang still lack the most important evidence to be officially facts. They themselves rely on belief, and u do 2, so think about dat before u put a downer on others beliefs. Also, religon causing wars is not God causing wars. Thats like saying if u stab me, ur parents are responsible. Stop being so 1 dimensional in ur thinking

[dredonBIRDYbird]

@352outlaw how am i proof? like really your gonna listen to the bible (wich was created by man, just to let you know) i wasnt created by someone living in the sky...btw religion was the cause of ALOT of wars, also racism....btw how was god created? and who was gods creator's creator??? you need actual proof, not just saying "you are the proof dumbass" or "the bible" that isnt proof