annoying fyi, monkeys are just as evolved as homo sapiens are, evolution is NOT like leveling an rpg character or something, there are no simple progressions in evolution from left to right, primitive to sophisticated, the assumed axiom that most people have that creatures evolve from simple to complex is wrong for many fundamental reasons.
Interestingly one of the easiest ways to destabilize this narrative are the concept of parasites, which are creatures that simplified their body plan to exploit their environment better.
Speak for yourself. Im returning to monke.
that is what I am saying though, you are returning to proto-humonke not monke
that’s a potato with legs
“Do you see any tails? We are apes, you fucking monkey.”
“Cladistically apes are monkeys, you dumbass monkey, your correction is DECADES behind trends in classification!”
“I actually didn’t know that, thanks for telling me you smartass monkey!”
Tbf not everyone agrees with cladistics, on account of it also classifying humans as fish and worms.
Huh, is it because of evolution? Men, fish and worms have the same ancestors? But then everything would be the same.
Also are Dragons a type of Wyvern? ;PAll Wyverns are a type of Dragon!
Yes, the problem phrase being “you can’t evolve out of a clade.” Every terrestrial animal is therefore a type a fish, and every fish is a worm, and we’re also all bacteria, etc.
A lot of people who say they agree with the idea (because you can’t really argue with the smaller scale usefulness of it) don’t like the actual larger implications and seemingly want a more vibe based classification, which is pointless. They’ll say things like “that’s why there is no fish clade” until you ask them what the clade of our earliest discernable fish ancestors was then, and how it’s different than “fish.”
Hmm, if it is useful, it does not need to make sense.
