>This is an important point. I continually encounter people who think that
>evolutionary theory implies that humans evolved from apes. The correct
>scenario from evolution would be that humans and apes evolved from an
>earlier ancestor and are equidistant in the evolution continuum.
What's the big deal about this unless people are ignorant enough to think
that gorillas gave rise to humans. Whether you ascribe *your* ancestor to
the apes or not depends on whether *you* choose to define the ancestor as an
ape or not. Since nobody who believes this seems to have a clue as to what
that ancestor was anyway, defining it as an *ape* sensu lato is not
unreasonable. So what motivates people to attempt to make this distinction?
Being able to correct an ignorant person who fails to distinguish an ape
from an presumptive ape ancestor dose not seem to be as high on my priority
list as it is for some.
Art
http://chadwicka.swac.edu