andrel <byt### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>  monkeys still are not a clade as
> the humans have to be left out.

Why should humans be left out?  Because someone's religion says so?  Because we
don't like being monkeys?

In everyday speech, it's fine to set humans apart from monkeys.  We do the same
thing when we talk about "humans and animals."  However, in scientific contexts,
there is no point to it.

> this sort of things happen more often when names are used that date back
> to when we did not know yet how the genetic relationships were. we have
> it e.g. where birds are dinosaurs, dinosaurs (apart from birds) are
> reptiles but birds are not reptiles.

Mammals are also descended from ancient reptiles.  The biological community is
going to have to decide what they want to do with the term "reptile."  And
"fish."  And perhaps "amphibian," although I haven't studied that term.

P.S. The bubbles in my Venn diagram show lay usage, not scientific.  That's why
humans aren't in any of the bubbles.  The image as a whole was intended to lay
bare how silly it is to set our species apart from other primates in light of
today's knowledge.

Post a reply to this message