Reclassification of Homo sapiens.

Looky here..

Litoria rubella
Little-Litoria-ru.jpg


Litoria infrafrenata
1084719696.jpg


Litoria nasuta
FRG0156.jpg



Different enough for you ? They are all in the same Genus (Litoria)
 
The main argument I can see is one of time. i.e about 6 million years of separation from gorillas and a and 6 million years since chimps and humans branched off.

treeacp2.gif


But thats assuming linear evolution and the necessity of linear differences in time/DNA similarity.
 
The main argument I can see is one of time. i.e about 6 million years of separation from gorillas and a and 6 million years since chimps and humans branched off.

treeacp2.gif


But thats assuming linear evolution and the necessity of linear differences in time/DNA similarity.

Ha ! They use the new classification in your image :D
 
Ha ! They use the new classification in your image :D

In fact, its the paper that supports it!!!1 :runaway:

Duh, I looked up the actual paper



“Implications of natural selection in shaping 99.4% nonsynonymous DNA identity between humans and chimpanzees: Enlarging genus Homo” by Derek E. Wildman, Monica Uddin, Guozhen Liu, Lawrence I. Grossman, and Morris Goodman, PNAS 2003 100: 7181-7188; published online before print as 10.1073/pnas.1232172100
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abs...IRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&fdate=4/1/2003
 
In fact, its the paper that supports it!!!1 :runaway:

Duh, I looked up the actual paper



“Implications of natural selection in shaping 99.4% nonsynonymous DNA identity between humans and chimpanzees: Enlarging genus Homo” by Derek E. Wildman, Monica Uddin, Guozhen Liu, Lawrence I. Grossman, and Morris Goodman, PNAS 2003 100: 7181-7188; published online before print as 10.1073/pnas.1232172100
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abs...IRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&fdate=4/1/2003

Ah thanks.. I couldn't find it :eek:
 
Well, I suppose it's not Litoria nasuta since it's called the Striped Rocket Frog.. :D
I'm assuming you see my point though..

Do you see mine? Or are you using anatomical differences as an argument? Whats the behavioural differences between Jetpack, Rocket pack and MacPack?
 
Do you see mine? Or are you using anatomical differences as an argument?
No, you were using anatomical differences as an argument against Chimps and Bonobo's belonging in the same Genus as us. I'm just showing you are wrong.

Whats the behavioural differences between Jetpack, Rocket pack and MacPack?
I'm guessing the MacPack is too fat to take off ?
 
I'm saying it doesn't matter if you are white, black, yellow or red [tall short fat thin]so long as I take one look at you and say FROG!
 
I'm saying it doesn't matter if you are white, black, yellow or red [tall short fat thin]so long as I take one look at you and say FROG!
Uh.. what ? :confused:

A genus contains many species that are distinguished from each other by the inability to interbreed. As spider said that the species classification is outdated, I disagreed.

I also disagree with you that Homo and Pan are in the same category. There is more than Homo sapiens in this category and all of them can be easily distinguished from a chimp or bonobo.

Now if you simply look at a human, chimp and bonobo and are confused about which is which, thats a different thing altogether.
 
So you look at a chimp and think Homo?

:roflmao:

Depends.. I'd size him up first, to see if I can take him. I wouldn't want to get beat up :D

But AGAIN, looks are unimportant. It's the genetics that link species together, not looks (frog example).
 
Back
Top