Tags

, , , ,

Scientists get extremely upset when people refer to chimpanzees and gorillas as monkeys, because that’s not how they use those terms, and since scientists have a superiority complex, they condemn anyone who doesn’t use language the way they do as “ignorant” or “anti-science”. Meanwhile you have a lot of science groupies, and pro-science bloggers, who like the pathetic little slaves that they are, adopt the language of the scientists, eager to please their masters. Well here’s how the dictionary defines “monkey”:

a nonhuman primate mammal with the exception usually of the lemurs and tarsiers; especially : any of the smaller longer-tailed catarrhine or platyrrhine primates as contrasted with the apes

So while the term “monkey” may refer most especially to non-ape higher primates, it’s 100% accurate to refer to chimps and gorillas as monkeys, so stop being pathetic betas who let these nerdy scientists lord over you, and please continue to refer to chimps and gorillas as monkeys.

But of course, the scientists will say the dictionary is wrong and that their criteria for defining words is more accurate, because it’s based on science. However at the genetic level, it has been claimed, that Old World monkeys are actually more related to apes and humans than they are to New World monkeys. So scientists are not doing any fancy genetic work when they define “monkey”, they’re simply using the more narrow version of the dictionary definition, and arrogantly trying to impose it on the rest of us.

Of course scientists would object to me saying “apes and humans” because in an act of incredible arrogance and stupidity, many scientists are trying to redefine the word “ape” to include humans, so virtually every ape referencing movie and book created before the last several years is obsolete if they get their way. So the movie “Planet of the Apes” must now be referred to as “Planet of the Non-human Apes”. The scientists argue that at the genetic level, apes are sometimes more closely related to humans than they are to each-other, so the distinction between apes and humans is false. The problem with this thinking is twofold:

1) Scientists don’t give a darn about genetic relatedness when they order us to stop referring to apes as monkeys, but when it comes to humans being apes, they suddenly invoke genetic criteria. That’s completely hypocritical and intellectually inconsistent.

2) Humans resemble apes genetically only for chronological reasons. We split off from them only several million years ago and using neutral genetic mutations, there is relatively little genetic distance between us and them. But neutral genetic changes are used to clock splitting off dates precisely because they are the genetic changes that don’t matter, because if such changes did matter, they would vary as a function of selection pressures, not time, and thus be useless as a genetic clock. But in terms of the genetic changes that actually affect what matters (the phenotype), humans and apes could not be more different. Unlike apes, humans are brilliant, big brained, technologically advanced, bipedal, hairless, speaking, non-prognathous creatures, so clearly, whatever unites us genetically with the apes is trivial and scientists need better genetic criteria.

But a lot of this isn’t about science. By saying humans are nothing but apes, people can prove how different they are from the creationists who believe that humans are at the pinnacle of all living things. Well that’s one area where the creationists were right, and modern science is wrong. Even a broken clock is right twice a day; and scientists need to get over it and stop wasting everyone’s time and energy with these childish word games.

Advertisements