We are Monkeys after all!

1. 60

   Mark Knowlesposted 11 years ago

   
   
   All apes are monkeys, but not all monkeys are apes.
   
   That makes us talking monkeys.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      oohooh ahah.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Just because our palettes are more complex and our throats can produce a wider variety of sound doesn't mean we're the only animals with sophisticated languages. See: Dolphins, prairie dogs, most birds, and every great ape.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, well, when the dolphins, prairie dogs, most birds, and every great ape decides to chime in on the discussion I'll be enthralled. Truly.
            
            We can all tick off a list of similarities in species; but many of you who adamantly argue for the similarities meaning something of grave importance won't acknowledge the differences that may be of grave importance.

            replyreport
      2. 0

         Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         You're not a monkey Emile.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah. It is. We all are.
            
            http://paolov.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/ … l-with-it/

            replyreport
         2. 0

            Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Mark's point isn't that we are monkeys. The thread exists simply to goad some into expressing opinions that don't jive with his so he can make fun of them.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               No it is not. There are a lot of people here who think we are not monkeys. I was sharing some information with them in the hope I can educate them otherwise. Sorry if that bothers you. I keep forgetting you make the  rules here.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  oohooh ahah.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     That is what you always seem to say.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Perhaps, you aren't a monkey after all Mr. Knowles. Those two posts were completely different comments. If you don't speak monkey and you can't interpret monkey talk, how can you claim to be one?

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           If you don't understand the language of another, aren't you human or the other one?

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Sometimes, my reaction to your posts is..."Say what?" I assume that's because English isn't your primary language.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Why, don't you understand speculative philosophy, now?
                                 If you don't understand the language of another, does that mean you are not human, or is it the other one who is not human? Your contention was that only those ones who speak the same language (or understand the same language) belongs to the same group of animals. I thought you were human, well obviously my mistake, I should have understood when you spoke this language  "oohooh ahah."!

                                 replyreport
                              2. 0

                                 riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Even though your primary language is English you don't understand most words and most of the time can say nothing but blab. From your example, I think I will be better off by not making English my primary language.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Your initial question was poorly worded. Interesting (and telling) that you can't reword it into a cohesive statement without attempting to belittle me. It isn't my fault you don't speak and write in English well enough to get your point across the first time.
                                    
                                    Ridiculous point anyway, considering the post you were questioning was obviously a joke.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 0

                                       riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                       I knowingly didn't complete the question.  Unlike you, I understand what I write, even the words I write. But I don't claim it as speculative philosophy when I write nonsense.
                                       
                                       I stated explicitly what you stated implicitly. Don't like it when you are in the receiving end?
                                       My point across? It seems either you cannot understand what others say or as others usually point out, you are not here to discuss but oppose anyone and everyone to show your "intelligence".
                                       
                                       
                                       In very poor taste?
                                       But that is a good excuse!

                                       report
                                       1. 0

                                          Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                          okee dokee. your mission here is obvious. Far be it from me to chastise you for trolling.

                                          report
                                          1. 0

                                             riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                             When you are routinely chastised for trolling, I think I will refrain from doing the same(because that will be a repetition and I see no good ever came out of it).

                                             report
                                             1. 0

                                                Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                If you say so.
                                                
                                                Are you done trolling, or is there more pointless attacking planned?

                                                report
                                                1. 0

                                                   riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                   Happy now or still more left?

                                                   report
                                                   1. 0

                                                      Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                      That's pretty much the gist of it.

                                                      report
                                                      1. 0

                                                         riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                                         This sure do look like your autobiography!

                                                         report
            2. 0

               Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               You missed my point Emile. *You're not a monkey.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I didn't miss your point. I think you missed Mark's point. I disagree with the argument that we didn't evolve along the same line with monkeys and apes, but we already knew that. The thread appears to be designed to belittle those who don't like to think we are related. What purpose does this serve?  Whether related, or not, I don't see that either opinion answers philosophical questions on who and what we are as a species. The differences are too glaring to ignore.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Actually, I was indeed ignoring his point. Im sure you can imagine Im not a people to monkey supporter. I am now regretting the joke.

                     replyreport
                  2. 60

                     Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Odd that you always take the negative view no matter who or what is being discussed. Interesting new ways of approaching taxonomies mean that we are actually classified as monkeys. Studying primates and monkeys does indeed give us valuable insights as to who we are as species.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        ... human

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Yup. Talking monkeys.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Michael Nesmith was always my favorite.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Before my time.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    HEY! They were reruns!

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 60

                                       Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                       Of course.

                                       report
                     2. 0

                        Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        I wouldn't necessarily classify it as the negative view. It is an opposing view. Why do you need to see things as negative? Or is it that you need for your opinion to be validated by others?  If so, why is that do you think? Insecurity? Belief in safety in numbers?
                        
                        But, physically, I would agree that the better we understand other species, the better we understand ourselves.

                        replyreport
            3. 0

               Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Oh no no.   I'm sure Mark really has learned something new and is simply sharing that with us in gleeful excitement!
                  I recall a few months back when he seemed to be convinced that all of mankind were apes.   So this is quite an improvement for him.   Who knows?----in a few more months or years he might even realize that biological evolution is total bunk and we're not monkeys either!

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I have indeed learned something new, and we are still apes, but new information tells us we are also monkeys. As I mentioned, "All apes are monkeys, but not all monkeys are apes."
                  
                  Guess you didn't bother reading the article huh? I know you are not a fan of learning anything new.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Gee, I dunno.   I guess I was confused about the article.   Us regular humans kinda have a tendency to not focus on people's words or articles they link to when they're trying to call us monkeys OR apes 'cause we know we're neither.
                     I'm disappointed, Mark.   I was hoping by now that you'd use your own intellectual prowess instead of taking the word of pseudo-science theorists.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        So - basically - no, you haven't bothered reading the article. And without having read it, you know it is wrong. Odd you have an opinion on it without knowing what it says. I thought you would be interested in new ways of looking at things, but I guess that is too much to expect. Would a youtube video explaining things be more your preference? Us talking monkeys are good at making them.

                        replyreport
                     2. 76

                        wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Oh, I don't know about that Brenda.  Most of us can set aside prejudices and look at what is meant by the statement that we're all apes (or monkeys).  We realize that it simply means that we fit into a classification of living creatures by characteristics but nothing more - characteristics that include stereoscopic vision, shortened snout compared to other animals, the type of teeth we have, clavicles and double boned forearms and lower legs, increased thumb mobility, trends towards more upright posture, larger brains and different usages of fore and hind limbs.  The word used to include all the mammals with these characteristics (and many more) isn't "monkey", but that is a common term that everyone thinks they understand (and offends many - often a desirable result) so it is often used.
                        
                        Sure, we could all make our own private biological classification system because we find the idea that we're a monkey distasteful, but most of us find that action to be deceitful and worthless to boot.  When everyone makes up their own system, communication becomes a little difficult.
                        
                        We all know and accept that humans share many of the physical characteristics of both apes and monkeys - why deny it when it is so obviously true?

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           I share many attributes with animals. That tells me a creator used a basic plan... that we should be able to walk, see, think, feed ourselves. What you perceive as one thing means something completely different to some of us.

                           replyreport
                           1. 76

                              wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              While you and I will disagree as to a conclusion of a creator, do you perceive that you have a grossly different scapula arrangement from a monkey as you do say, from a horse?  Are you closer to a manta ray in physical characteristics than you are to a pine tree?
                              
                              That sort of thing is why you are classified as more like a monkey rather than an equine type animal or a plant.  That's all, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with a creator or the uniqueness of homo sapiens.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 And then when you factor in homo habilis and homo erectus, homo sapiens isn't that unique anyway!

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 76

                                    wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Only if you accept that those were actual living creatures and not just some bones put in the ground by Satan.
                                    
                                    But today, the brain of humans make them unique, just as the eyes of an eagle, the ears of an elk or the nose of a polar bear makes them unique.  Or the height of a redwood tree makes it unique.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 60

                                       Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                       I'll never understand the people who make that claim.
                                       
                                       Are they saying Satan has the power of Creation now? That he basically now has the same power as God? Sounds like heresy to me. We should probably gather up all those people and have ourselves a good old-fashioned mass execution as Christian tradition dictates.

                                       report
                                       1. 76

                                          wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                          *shrug*  To some it is preferable to make up more and more fanciful stories that support or agree with a primary belief than it is to change that belief even slightly.  Such is life and the rationalizing ability of the "monkey" called homo sapiens.  A large brain can be both a blessing and a curse all at the same time.

                                          report
                              2. 0

                                 Beth37posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Gotcha.

                                 replyreport
   2. 60

      HattieMattieMaeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I would love the idea of being a monkey. I could swing free any where I please and do what I want and get away with it, and hoepfully monkey's don't interfere with your life so you can enjoy it, be happy, and blissful in the moment. I could just look at people and think how strange they are, because they have to fight, and be right or wrong all the time. They have to worry about everything, and stress about everything. I believe being a monkey would be very freeing. No responsibility, but just sit in the sun and sun bathe, or sit under a leafy branch and watch the rain pour. I could go swimming any time, and build things, and who cares what happens to it, it was just for fun and play anyway, or daily excercise. I guess some how in some way I'd find ways to entertain myself. I could make people laugh. Well it's not so bad being a monkey i have no bills to pay, or any other responsibility for that matter.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         What is stopping you?

         replyreport
      2. 67

         psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         It's all fun and games until you get eaten by a jaguar.

         replyreport
2. 86

   gmwilliamsposted 11 years ago

   Yes, humans are part of the primate family.  Yes, monkeys and apes are our distant relatives.  Yes, we have evolved from them.  The point is made, it is very simple to understand.  Intelligent and educated people know this so there is no argument regarding the facts and subject at hand. Yes, there was such an occurrence as evolution of the species from the most simplest to the most comples.
   
   While we humans are the most advanced of all animal species, we oftentimes act mindlessly, selfishly, and stupidly.  We can act as worse as the most lowly animal at time.  In fact, we can be the most dangerous and deadly animal on the planet because of our intelligence which is used in negative and destructive ways instead of positively and constructively.  Evidence of such inane and unthinking behavior are wars, overpopulation, adherence to outmoded and atavistic mores and ethics, religious wars, sexism, racism, ageism, and other forms of antiprogressive and retrogressive behaviors.
   
   Mark, this thread is an interesting one which will lend itself to some great and insightful scientific discussions and discourses.  Yes, humans are intelligent animals but sadly many humans do not use their intelligence but prefer to conform and be part of the herd and mob. Have a nice day, Mr. Knowles.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Mark Knowlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      So - anyone who does not believe humans are actually monkeys is unintelligent and uneducated?
      
      I am glad you said that and not me. Have nice day yourself.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Pretty much, yeah.

         replyreport
   2. 76

      wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "While we humans are the most advanced of all animal species"
      
      Really?  We're weak, slow, and any camouflage is poor.  Our eyes don't work very well, we can hardly smell at all and our hearing is pathetic.  Our immune system is hardly worth mention and we have a strong tendency to eat ourselves to death (if the tribe provides; very few could survive without the tribe).
      
      Our only claim to fame is the gray matter between our ears.  We are killers through and through, destroyers of everything we touch and that brain makes it all possible. 
      
      "Advanced"? I don't think so...

      replyreport
      1. 86

         gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         That synopsis of the negative side of the human condition was included in my post, Wilderness. My assessment of the human condition was NOT all positive.

         replyreport
3. 74

   Seafarer Mamaposted 11 years ago

   I believe in evolution, but I truly believe that Humans have evolved into our own species....and are still evolving....~:0)  But it's still fun to monkey around online occasionally.  ~:0)
   
   oooh oooh eeeh eeh aaaah.

   replyreport
4. 60

   Jeramiposted 11 years ago

   88Emile Rposted 7 hours ago riddle666 wrote:
   I knowingly didn't complete the question.  Unlike you, I understand what I write, even the words I write. But I don't claim it as speculative philosophy when I write nonsense.
   
   I stated explicitly what you stated implicitly. Don't like it when you are in the receiving end?
   My point across? It seems either you cannot understand what others say or as others usually point out, you are not here to discuss but oppose anyone and everyone to show your "intelligence".
   
   
   In very poor taste?
   But that is a good excuse!
   ================================
   
   me ......     I don't think I have ever meet anyone that didn't think they had their fair share of wisdom or intelegance AND thought some other people didn't understand them cause ,,,   well (?) they just wasn't smart enough to understand properly

   replyreport
5. 55

   EncephaloiDeadposted 11 years ago

   I'm a monkey?
   
   Was wondering why my knuckles were sore, that explains it.

   replyreport
6. 55

   EncephaloiDeadposted 11 years ago

   According to Ray Comfort, the banana was designed by God to fit perfectly in mans hand, but I wonder why Ray didn't comment on why the banana is one of the main foods of monkeys when it fits so well in their hands, also?
   
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5ropaj_04I

   replyreport
   1. 85

      WiccanSageposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Even more ironic is the banana he's using is the one domesticated by man-- an evolved form from the original banana that was extremely big, flat, hard and bitter. If a banana fitting in our hand and tasting good proves a god, then Ray has proven that humans are their own gods, because we made the banana that way.

      replyreport