Do you know the difference between Humans and Chimpanzees?
815283
Well, I am not a christian. And I don't believe that god is always bothered about us, humans only. I think god doesn't care if a tiger kills a man or vice-versa. Even he is not bothered about if a sudden cosmos come and destroys the earth. Because to him/her (?, Why do we always think god is like some living organism?) every matter and energy is same.
844338
The difference can be quantified by computing the similarities between the DNA sequences of homo sapiens and other animal species. He's right, the differences are very little. More than 98% of our DNA sequence is similar to the chimpanzee. The gorilla, orangutan and other old world apes are also extremely close. The new world apes are farther, then the monkies, and so on...
479869
Pan paniscus, pygmy chimp, bonobo... whatever you call them, yes they are our closest genetic relatives. Behaviorally they are a lot more human-like as well. It's eerie watching videos of them sometimes, because they can walk fully upright without bent knees for several steps (the common chimp walks with bent knees when it walks upright).\n\nHowever that does not mean that they are our ancestor, because they've been evolving for 6+ million years as well since we split from a common ancestor. Chimps and humans shared the last common ancestor; before that, the common ancestor was to gorillas, chimps and humans.\n\nThere are a few types of chimps, including Pan troglodytes (I think that's spelled correctly) which is a very close relative to the pygmy chimp.
183631
snoopyyoukin..., by all scientific and biological definitions, humans ARE primates.\n\nTo answer your question, we can't really be sure.  I would say that some other primates, like chimps, probably have a rudimentary form of religion, but it is not as advanced and abstract as human religions.  Religion in humans probably partially formed from making causal connections in the world (when I do A, B happens.)  A person did one thing, then out of sheer coincidence, someting positive happened, leading them to suspect that the two may have been related.  (even if you don't want to say this is partially the origin of your religion, you can see how it has played a role in the formation of other religions)  It is obvious that chimps are capable of making connections like this.  I think the question would be what is necessary to turn the mere inference of causality into religion.  If it is an abstract metaphysical explanation of the causality (when I do A, it pleases the gods, leading to B) then chimps probably would not have religion.  But if it is a simplified version of this (such as when I do A, B will probably happen, even though I can't see an obvious connection), then chimps probably do have some form of religion.  \n\nThe tell tale way, I think, to find out if thoughts like the above are in the mind of the primate in question would be to observe whether or not they perform any apparently pointless rituals.  While the being making a tool for future use would not indicate religion, since there is an obvious connection between the act and desired outcome, the being dancing while making the tool would raise questions.  Any "extra" activities like this, which serve no pragmatic purpose, but are done anyway on a regular basis, would be ritual, i think.  There must be some reason for the behavior (assuming the creature doesn't suffer from mental illness) and if there is no reason for it in the external world, it must be a reason in the mind of the being.  It would not be proof that they had made a connection between two unrelated events, but it would be an indication that they had.  Since some rituals are observed in chimps, and chimps definitely do demonstrate an understanding of causality, the evidence would point to them at least having the very basics of religious belief - a concept of causation which goes beyond what they sense in the physical world and apparently unnecessary (to an outsider) rituals.
353195
*Sigh* This question has been asked so many times, it's almost sad. Here's the deal: we did not evolve directly from monkeys and apes. Humans, monkeys and apes all evolved from ONE COMMON ANCESTOR. This common ancestor has since died off. So, let's put it this way: monkeys and apes are our distant cousins, rather than our distant brothers and sisters. That make sense?\n\nHere's a better question: if man DIDN'T evolve from monkeys and apes, why are we 99% genetically similar to them? \n\nThank you, by the way, for stating monkeys AND apes in your question instead of just monkeys. Strictly speaking, we are more related to apes than to monkeys. And yes, there's a difference.
413895
Chimpanzees aren't exactly built for high speed endurance.  They are faster on all fours, knuckle walking in kind of a loping bounding gait, but even then an average human could probably run them down.  Where they excel is in areas where there are branches or other overhanging structures they can swing from.  Using a combination of brachiation (swinging) and running, they are much swifter and also much more unpredictable in their direction, making them much harder for something like a leopard to get them.
60131
I agree; humans and modern monkeys share a common ancestor.  Homosapien sapien (what *we* are) actually directly descended from homo erectus.  \n\nAll the scientific evidence backs this common descent up, btw.  We share a common morphology with chimps as well as a common molecular make up, which indicates that we share a common ancestor.  How else would you rationally explian it?\n\nFurthermore we share malfunctioning genes.  One in particular is a gene that prevents our bodies from producing vitamin C.  It seems that far back in our line of descent one of our distant ancestors was able to produce vitamin C.  This production was halted by a mutation - a mutation that all modern chimps share with us.  This is powerful evidence for a common lineage between chimps and humans because the best explanation is that this mutation was passed on through our evolutionary heritage.  \n\nThe creationist answer is, quite frankly, retarded.  They would have us believe that an all knowing and all benevolent entity created humans and chimps with a gene that produces vitamin C AND a gene that inhibits it's production.  An *intelligent* designer would just not have put in the genes for producing vitamin C in the first place!
595826
There used to be more than one species of humans but they died out. Technically there are animals that are our species like chimps, but are not humans. Some researches even believe we should be part of the same genus as well. All dogs are one species just different breeds like we have different races.  There are probably so many species of frogs because they can all cohabitate on the earth without interfering with each other and killing each other off.
228640
Different species,evolve differently and we are a different specie than apes.The apes are evolving too it takes longer than the human eye can see in large animals.Small creatures can be observed under a microscope in there process of evaluation and your own cells as well.You can also observe evolution in your own body when you catch a cold you will never catch the same virus again because you have built up a resistance to it.When you get a sun tan your body is changing to adjust to the increased exposure by changing to a deeper color.I really wish you could expand your mind and try to believe with all the beauty in nature why would god choose to be in the image of man and the evil things we do to everything.  Good Luck!
523971
Firstly, monkeys haven't evolved into humans.  Modern humans evolved through various ape-like ancestors over many millions of years, with homo sapiens appearing around 20-30,000 years ago.\n\nThe way I understand it, for something to evolve, there has to be an available evolutionary niche to fill.  Humans (and their early ancestors like homo ergaster or homo erectus) have filled theirs.  Even if they hadn't, any other ape would probably have evolved into something that was quite different from homo sapiens.\n\nChimpanzees (the closest living relatives to homo sapiens, us) have evolved to fill their niche.  There is nowhere else for them to evolve to (although they are advancing, see http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1006_041006_chimps.html for info), no available evolutionary niche that needs them.  \n\nOf course chimps, gorillas etc have evolved over millions of years and are different from their ancestors who lived at that time.  They are constantly evolving and in many millions more years will probably be quite different from what they are now.\n\nP.S. Monkeys are different from apes!  They are often smaller and most of them have a prehensile tail, whereas apes do not (and there are differences again between Old and New World Monkeys).  Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate for some more info.
474165
Humans, or human beings, are classified as bipedal primates belonging to the mammalian species Homo sapiens (Latin for "wise man" or "thinking man") under the family Hominidae (the great apes).[1] Humans have a highly developed brain capable of abstract reasoning, language, and introspection. This, combined with an erect body carriage that frees their upper limbs for manipulating objects, has allowed humans to make greater use of tools than any other species of animal.\n\nLike most primates, humans are by nature social. However, humans are particularly adept at utilizing systems of communication for self-expression and the exchange of ideas. Humans create complex social structures composed of co-operating and competing groups, ranging in scale from nations to individual families, and social interaction between humans has established a variety of social norms, rituals, traditions, values, laws, and ethics which form the basis of human society. Humans also have an appreciation for beauty and aesthetics which, combined with the human desire for self-expression, has led to cultural innovations such as art, literature and music.\n\nHumans are also noted for their desire to understand and influence the world around them, seeking to explain and manipulate natural phenomena through science, religion, philosophy and mythology. This natural curiosity has led to the development of advanced tools and skills; humans are the only species to build fires, cook their food, clothe themselves, and use numerous other technologies. It has also led to the exploration of spiritual concepts such as the soul and deities, and has factored into the self-awareness of humans, leading to self-reflection and the development of distinct personalities.\n\nHumans are commonly referred to as persons or people, and collectively as man, mankind, humankind, humanity, or the human race. Until the 20th century, human was only used adjectivally ("pertaining to mankind"). As an adjective, "human" is used neutrally (as in "human race"), but "human" and especially "humane" may also emphasize positive aspects of human nature, and can be synonymous with "benevolent" (as opposed to "inhumane"; cf. humanitarian).\n\nIn general, the word people is a collective noun used to define a specific group of humans. However, when used to refer to a group of humans possessing a common ethnic, cultural or national unitary characteristic or identity, "people" is a singular noun, and as such takes an "s" in the plural; (examples: "the English-speaking peoples of the world", "the indigenous peoples of Brazil"). A distinction is also maintained in philosophy and law between the notions "human being", or "man", and "person". The former refers to the species, while the latter refers to a rational agent.\n\nJuvenile male humans are called boys, adult males men (not to be confused with the gender-neutral man or mankind), juvenile females girls, and adult females women.\n\n[edit]\nBiology\nMain article: Human biology \n[edit]\nPhysiology and genetics\nMain articles: Human anatomy, Human physical appearance and Genetics of humans \n \nAn old diagram of a male human skeleton.Human body types vary substantially. Although body size is largely determined by genes, it is also significantly influenced by environmental factors such as diet and exercise. The average height of a North American adult female is 162 centimetres (5 feet 4 inches), and the average weight is 62 kilograms (137 pounds). Human males are typically larger than females: the average height and weight of a North American adult male is 175 centimeters (5 feet 9 inches) and 78 kilograms (172 pounds).\n\nHumans are capable of fully bipedal locomotion, thus leaving their arms available for manipulating objects using their hands, aided especially by opposable thumbs. Because human p
1111314
when we first discovered they could do this,it was amazing.before this they asumed that a chimps brain was too small to do this.and they were wrong.and humans and apes are the only animals that can learn to use tools.
774372
Since this is the Science section:  The most widely held *scientific* theory ... accepted by the overwhelming majority of biologists ... is that humans evolved from an earlier form of primate, and split from the other primates about 6 million years ago.  \n\nThe defining characteristic that led to the development of humans, and further divergence (separation) from the other primates, is an enormous expansion of the cerebral cortex part of the brain, (which may have been largely accelerated by the development of very articulate vocal cords).
422928
I would have to say porpoises/dolphins...\nAccording to this article, they are smarter than chimps and possibly as intelligent as man...\nhttp://www.amusingfacts.com/facts/Detail/smart-porpoise.html\n\nAlso see:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_brain\nhttp://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/D/dolphins.html\nhttp://www.wdcs.org/dan/publishing.nsf/allnews/239F297BE9A133F380256FC700323B80\nhttp://whales7.tripod.com/policies/levasseur/levass2f.html
699275
Did really humans?  chimpanges?  I have not a clue.\n\nI would suggest, you may have evolved from under a rock.\n\n.
259118
Humans ARE animals. We are a mammalian species of bipedal primates called "homo sapiens."\n\nMany people believe humans are separate from animals because of our superior intelligence, but I think intelligence is just a trait that every animal has, some more than others. Cheetahs and peregrine falcons are superior in speed, elephants and Kodiak bears are superior in strength, and squirrels and jaguars are superior in agility, for a few other examples of superiority. Just because we are capable of more things than other animals intellectually does not make us something foreign to the Animal Kingdom.
1181995
Humans and monkeys evolved from the same common ancestor.\nNow humans and monkeys are seperate species. \nComparisons between chimp and human DNA show the two species share 95 per cent of their genetic material.\nMonkeys aren't going to change into humans - this has nothing to do with Darwin's theory on human origins.