Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,911 Year: 4,168/9,624 Month: 1,039/974 Week: 366/286 Day: 9/13 Hour: 1/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Biological Evolution ⇒

Evolutionary History of Apes

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolutionary History of Apes
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 9.2

Normal Thread Display
Message 9 of 25 (530216)
10-12-2009 5:33 PM 		Reply to: Message 7 by New Cat's Eye
10-12-2009 5:19 PM

Is it possible that one of these early homos is already the common ancestor between us and chimps? Or do we know that isn't the case (like through genetics or something)?
​
Homo itself, no. No way. The earliest known homonids, well, possible but very unlikely for two reasons:
​
1. The dates are wrong. The consensus dates for when humans and chimps split are about 1-3 million years before these fossils. However, the methods of dating are prone to error so it's possible - if unlikely.
​
2. All known hominids have derived traits not found in chimps. That is, they have features they share with us and/or later hominids but not with chimps or earlier apes. It is, again, possible that the chimp line evolved these traits but later reverted to the primitive state but it's unlikely.
​
(Note: primitive here just means in the ancestral state, it's the opposite of derived. For example, in humans, having five fingers and two eyes are primitive traits whilst bipediality and hairlessness are derived traits)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-12-2009 5:19 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-12-2009 5:40 PM Dr Jack has replied
  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 9.2

Normal Thread Display
Message 11 of 25 (530222)
10-12-2009 5:42 PM 		Reply to: Message 10 by New Cat's Eye
10-12-2009 5:40 PM

Homo, shmomo
Holy shit. I was using "homo" as an abbreviation for homonid and not the genus Homo >.< What a stupid abbreviation!
​
Yeah, I figured you were, but I thought I'd just make sure
​
And, in general, the naming for the human containing clades is awful Hominidae, Hominid, Hominoidae, Homininae.
​
Edited by Mr Jack, : Extra, extra!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-12-2009 5:40 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 9.2

Normal Thread Display
Message 14 of 25 (530353)
10-13-2009 5:41 AM 		Reply to: Message 13 by RAZD
10-12-2009 8:19 PM

Ah... I see the dating of the split has been revised forward, last I saw it was estimated at 6-8 Ma. So my point 1 above was wrong. Cool
This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by RAZD, posted 10-12-2009 8:19 PM RAZD has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by RAZD, posted 10-13-2009 6:32 PM Dr Jack has seen this message but not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024