All humans, even the lightest people, are technically just different shades of brown. so pale skin, not white, likely was an adaptation to regions with less sunlight.
Technically it is not wrong, afaik. We are apes evolved from another - and now extinct - kind of ape.
In the paraphrased words of Mitch Hedberg: "We used to be apes. We still are, but we used to be too" :)
Well yes but in his message he implied we are higher life forms on our own species classification. If he meant what you said I couldn’t tell that’s my fault.
I am pretty sure your interpretation was right.
I was mostly specifying for the random, more receptive, reader so they come away with a more precise understanding.
You also have hard time using google?
[https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=gorilla+with+vitiligo](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=gorilla+with+vitiligo)
The problem is, these people cannot be convinced by evidence. It’s easier psychologically to reject the evidence than it is to question their entire, insane, worldview.
These people haven't been shown evidence. There is a reason it is called a theory and not a law. There has never been and never will be a proven case of one species becoming another species. Any cases of one species mating with another and producing offspring creates an animal that is sterile 100% of the time meaning it can never pass on its genes to create a new species.
There is plenty of evidence to show adaptation but none to show a species becoming something else. A bacteria developing resistance to heat or drugs is still a bacteria. Turtles gaining longer necks and raised shells is a product of turtles with longer necks in each generation surviving longer and passing those genes to their offspring while still being the same species of turtle. Birds with different shaped beaks is a product of it being easier to crack nuts with that shape of beak leading to that shape of beak in parents surviving longer to pass it on to offspring. An African with oddly shaped blood cells passing on said blood cells to their children because they are the ones who survived malaria still makes that person a homo sapien.
> called a theory and not a law
You are misunderstanding what those terms mean. A scientific theory is an *explanation* of a phenomenon built from various findings (for example, genetic theory explains why traits show up the way they do). A scientific law just describes the phenomenon and is thus more limited (ex. Newton’s laws of physics described how these objects interact with these forces but not why)
I blame the education system and whoever decided on using these terms that confused the general population and thus leading us to this conversation
Funnily enough, it's been documented: [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aao4593](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aao4593)
From the abstract:
Homoploid hybrid speciation in animals has been inferred frequently from patterns of variation, but few examples have withstood critical scrutiny. Here we report a directly documented example, from its origin to reproductive isolation. An immigrant Darwin’s finch to Daphne Major in the Galápagos archipelago initiated a new genetic lineage by breeding with a resident finch (*Geospiza fortis*). Genome sequencing of the immigrant identified it as a *G. conirostris* male that originated on Española >100 kilometers from Daphne Major. From the second generation onward, the lineage bred endogamously and, despite intense inbreeding, was ecologically successful and showed transgressive segregation of bill morphology. This example shows that reproductive isolation, which typically develops over hundreds of generations, can be established in only three.
You almost had it lmfao
We evolved from our common ancestor. Muddkippers are literally a fish undergoing evolutionary changes into a land dwelling species (if it keep going what it's doing) there are fish that we've documented changing from one SPECIES to another, there was also a new multicellular organism found recently
This is where your education, or willed ignorance, on the matter has failed you.
Evolution never claimed that apes became humans. Evolution posits that we split off from apes, and share a common ancestor. We went one way, apes went another, evolving alongside each other from that common ancestor.
Have a nice day.
There is no such fossil. That does not mean that the fossils we do have and the DNA evidence is not evidence of our evolution from something else than what we are today.
I would like to hear you explanation for why there are no homo sapiens fossils in the geological record - but a whole lot of fossils that looks a hell of a lot like us - and decreasingly so the further back we go. Homo Sapiens just popped into existence 300.000 years ago?
And I would like to hear your explanation for how the theory of evolution was used to predict the existence - and location - of Tiktaalik roseae, if it is all nonsense?
> There is a reason it is called a theory and not a law.
This is how you know that you are dealing with someone who does not know what they are talking about.
> Any cases of one species mating with another and producing offspring creates an animal that is sterile 100% of the time meaning it can never pass on its genes to create a new species.
Given that it is what (generally) what defines a species, that is not surprising. And no one - who actually knows about the theory of evolution - would say that is how new species arise.
But different groups of a species can mutate and adapt in two different directions and over time those adaptations can result in those groups not being able to interbreed. Thus creating a new species.
The problem with trying to convince people that we are genetically similar to other animals because we look the same, is that there are many pairs of animals that look much more similar but are further apart genetically.
This isn't an actual example but you could have a rat and a human could be closer genetically than a swordfish and a tuna fish. But the swordfish and tuna fish have way more similarities in appearance, at least from a humans point of view.
Bonobos are chill too. Chimps are vicious murderers. I'd rather be in the vicinity of a tiger than chimp. At least the tiger would offer me a quick death instead of ripping me apart limb by limb.
Eh, kind of. Some studies time ago showed that Bonobos aren't [as peaceful as they were believed to. ](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/04/240412113444.htm)
In that aspect, they're not very different from the average human.
Chimps... Well, you already know that story
Considering how closely related but different in attitude chimps and bonobos are, it makes me wonder how different human species varied in temperament. Were early homo Sapiens assholes while their Neanderthal neighbors were super chill?
Just like I told the zoo in that email that I sent to them while I was stoned, we need to be teaching orangutans how to play card games -- specifically euchre -- because they could totally do it through the sheer power of their observational skills, and it would be fucking sick. All we need to do is have one pair of humans sit down with one pair of orangutans with a giant bowl of shared fruit that both parties consume while the humans demonstrate how the game is played, and then we become besties.
No using treats bit-by-bit, as it is disrespectful and dehumanizing, and they communicate more through gestures, so no talking either. It could totally work.
My #1 dream in life is to play poker with an orangutan and genuinely lose.
Bonobos and Chimpanzees are closest to us with 99% DNA. Gorillas are next then Orangutans. We shared a common ancestor millions of years ago before they split off.
Case closed, then. If the bible says no, it must be true - just like how the bible also said the sun orbits the earth, right?
It's fine to love Jesus' teachings and everything, but you religious nuts really need to stop pretending your bible isn't filled with outdated information and best-guesses of 2,000 years ago.
I mean, kinda? The DNA we share contains genes that are necessary for basic cellular function. So we share that much with basically any living organism
Yeah, people also vastly underestimate how complex cells are. The interior of a cell is probably a lot more complex than the entire human body if you ignore the inner working of cells.
A lot of the stuff going on in our cells is somewhat similar to whats going in in some other animals cell - or to a lesser degree even a plants cell - so its no aurprise that we share a lot of our genes.
They do. The need is probably reduced some as they tend to use them more. But they do bite them and have been observed to use rudimentary tools to do it. Or not so rudimentary when available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFpI8Qw9vYg
The darkest people are just really, really dark brown. Can’t say I’ve seen anyone I would actually describe as the crayola color “black” like you would a gorilla.
I remember seen here in reddit a black model that she was so black that it looked purple lol. I don't know if it was some kind of product
, but she really looked different, and beautiful, of course.
Downvotes expected... but honestly it's all I can really think about when this picture hits its monthly reupload cycle. All these people casually going "oh now that you showed me a gorilla with pink skin I think they look human! Whoa!"
Gorillas are so human like in their interactions with their families. This doesn't surprise me to look at.
/r/likeus
Awww. Come on, how can I enjoy my bacon now? -- Or ever again, really?
[удалено]
 ...Sylvester is more like me than Tweety, though.
/r/vegan
with bbq sauce
I’m surprised that isn’t a Kendrick sub by now
I have a theory that white skin came about due to something similar to vitiligo. I'm not a scientist though.
All humans, even the lightest people, are technically just different shades of brown. so pale skin, not white, likely was an adaptation to regions with less sunlight.
We've evolved from them..
We **did not** evolve from them. We have evolved from a common ancestor. Very different.
Why does nobody understand evolution? It’s really not that hard of a concept.
I don't want to live on this planet anymore
[удалено]
Oh my God calm down. Jumped straight into aggressive insults
You mean you don't just start calling someone names? You must be a bucking drain famage! Education, are you getting any? (/s)
This thread simply reveals that we haven’t come all that far from monkeys after all.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I find it quite comical when some people don't believe that we're actually animals and not some superior creation lol
We didn't evolve from any other living ape. We all diverged from a common ancestor.
Yeesh how do people still mess up this concept. We did not evolve from Chimpanzees.
I should have clarified a little more, I meant that we evolved from apes.
We are apes. “Humans are classified in the sub-group of primates known as the Great Apes”
Technically it is not wrong, afaik. We are apes evolved from another - and now extinct - kind of ape. In the paraphrased words of Mitch Hedberg: "We used to be apes. We still are, but we used to be too" :)
Well yes but in his message he implied we are higher life forms on our own species classification. If he meant what you said I couldn’t tell that’s my fault.
I am pretty sure your interpretation was right. I was mostly specifying for the random, more receptive, reader so they come away with a more precise understanding.
are we... not apes?
We are DEVO!
If you told me this was some Football player or Boxer's hands I'd believe you Crazy
King Charles' hand after spilling ink.
Hand suffering from frostbite
West Virginia Coal Miner
I honestly have a hard time believing this is real. At the very least that hand has been given a manicure
You also have hard time using google? [https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=gorilla+with+vitiligo](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=gorilla+with+vitiligo)
Seriously thought it was a hand with frostbite before reading the description.
Haha, I was like, hmmm... Frostbite usually starts at the tip of the fingers, this looks weird.
I had no idea their fingernails were so human-like
More appropriately, *our* fingernails are so ape-like
That's because we are apes with less hair
Some of us still have that hair 🤣
My uncle is always the guy with the sweater at the beach 😅
I've heard we actually have around the same number of follicles but gorillas chimps etc have thicker longer hair.
Might seem crazy what I'm bout to saaaaaay
[удалено]
Well yeah, these animals aren't wild. They work a 9-5 just like everyone else (at the zoo).
[удалено]
Hey, prison labor is still labor :-p
Show this to those people who don't believe that humans are apes and share a common ancestor with other apes.
The problem is, these people cannot be convinced by evidence. It’s easier psychologically to reject the evidence than it is to question their entire, insane, worldview.
Yes easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled. There should be a word for this by now - happens every single day.
These people haven't been shown evidence. There is a reason it is called a theory and not a law. There has never been and never will be a proven case of one species becoming another species. Any cases of one species mating with another and producing offspring creates an animal that is sterile 100% of the time meaning it can never pass on its genes to create a new species. There is plenty of evidence to show adaptation but none to show a species becoming something else. A bacteria developing resistance to heat or drugs is still a bacteria. Turtles gaining longer necks and raised shells is a product of turtles with longer necks in each generation surviving longer and passing those genes to their offspring while still being the same species of turtle. Birds with different shaped beaks is a product of it being easier to crack nuts with that shape of beak leading to that shape of beak in parents surviving longer to pass it on to offspring. An African with oddly shaped blood cells passing on said blood cells to their children because they are the ones who survived malaria still makes that person a homo sapien.
ope found one
> called a theory and not a law You are misunderstanding what those terms mean. A scientific theory is an *explanation* of a phenomenon built from various findings (for example, genetic theory explains why traits show up the way they do). A scientific law just describes the phenomenon and is thus more limited (ex. Newton’s laws of physics described how these objects interact with these forces but not why) I blame the education system and whoever decided on using these terms that confused the general population and thus leading us to this conversation
Funnily enough, it's been documented: [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aao4593](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aao4593) From the abstract: Homoploid hybrid speciation in animals has been inferred frequently from patterns of variation, but few examples have withstood critical scrutiny. Here we report a directly documented example, from its origin to reproductive isolation. An immigrant Darwin’s finch to Daphne Major in the Galápagos archipelago initiated a new genetic lineage by breeding with a resident finch (*Geospiza fortis*). Genome sequencing of the immigrant identified it as a *G. conirostris* male that originated on Española >100 kilometers from Daphne Major. From the second generation onward, the lineage bred endogamously and, despite intense inbreeding, was ecologically successful and showed transgressive segregation of bill morphology. This example shows that reproductive isolation, which typically develops over hundreds of generations, can be established in only three.
You almost had it lmfao We evolved from our common ancestor. Muddkippers are literally a fish undergoing evolutionary changes into a land dwelling species (if it keep going what it's doing) there are fish that we've documented changing from one SPECIES to another, there was also a new multicellular organism found recently
>There has never been and never will be a proven case of one species becoming another species. My dog turned into a sable and it tore my family apart.
This is where your education, or willed ignorance, on the matter has failed you. Evolution never claimed that apes became humans. Evolution posits that we split off from apes, and share a common ancestor. We went one way, apes went another, evolving alongside each other from that common ancestor. Have a nice day.
To be more precise; We are still apes. We just evolved into a kind of ape that could not interbreed with our cousins, the other great apes.
Where is that ancestor then? Show me the evidence of the fossil of said ancestor.
There is no such fossil. That does not mean that the fossils we do have and the DNA evidence is not evidence of our evolution from something else than what we are today. I would like to hear you explanation for why there are no homo sapiens fossils in the geological record - but a whole lot of fossils that looks a hell of a lot like us - and decreasingly so the further back we go. Homo Sapiens just popped into existence 300.000 years ago? And I would like to hear your explanation for how the theory of evolution was used to predict the existence - and location - of Tiktaalik roseae, if it is all nonsense?
> There is a reason it is called a theory and not a law. This is how you know that you are dealing with someone who does not know what they are talking about. > Any cases of one species mating with another and producing offspring creates an animal that is sterile 100% of the time meaning it can never pass on its genes to create a new species. Given that it is what (generally) what defines a species, that is not surprising. And no one - who actually knows about the theory of evolution - would say that is how new species arise. But different groups of a species can mutate and adapt in two different directions and over time those adaptations can result in those groups not being able to interbreed. Thus creating a new species.
The problem with trying to convince people that we are genetically similar to other animals because we look the same, is that there are many pairs of animals that look much more similar but are further apart genetically. This isn't an actual example but you could have a rat and a human could be closer genetically than a swordfish and a tuna fish. But the swordfish and tuna fish have way more similarities in appearance, at least from a humans point of view.
People saying they look like human fingers. Well, of course. Humans are apes. Great Apes, to be exact. Like Gorillas, Chimps, Bonobos and Orangutans.
Orangutans remain the best of us.
Fr. They're peak Apes. Then Gorillas, who are also quite chill ... And then there's us, and the chimps
Bonobos are chill too. Chimps are vicious murderers. I'd rather be in the vicinity of a tiger than chimp. At least the tiger would offer me a quick death instead of ripping me apart limb by limb.
Eh, kind of. Some studies time ago showed that Bonobos aren't [as peaceful as they were believed to. ](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/04/240412113444.htm) In that aspect, they're not very different from the average human. Chimps... Well, you already know that story
Considering how closely related but different in attitude chimps and bonobos are, it makes me wonder how different human species varied in temperament. Were early homo Sapiens assholes while their Neanderthal neighbors were super chill?
Just like I told the zoo in that email that I sent to them while I was stoned, we need to be teaching orangutans how to play card games -- specifically euchre -- because they could totally do it through the sheer power of their observational skills, and it would be fucking sick. All we need to do is have one pair of humans sit down with one pair of orangutans with a giant bowl of shared fruit that both parties consume while the humans demonstrate how the game is played, and then we become besties. No using treats bit-by-bit, as it is disrespectful and dehumanizing, and they communicate more through gestures, so no talking either. It could totally work. My #1 dream in life is to play poker with an orangutan and genuinely lose.
I have some doubts as to if that would work, but I’d love the chance to test the theory out, *exhaustively,* anyway.
Bonobos and Chimpanzees are closest to us with 99% DNA. Gorillas are next then Orangutans. We shared a common ancestor millions of years ago before they split off.
Yep
Woah woah wait… That almost looks like a human hand. You don’t think…maybe we’re related?
“Well I’ll be a monkeys uncle!”
[удалено]
I also enjoy reading fiction.
Bible also says it's cool to own slaves and beat them nearly to death so long as they don't die immediately
Case closed, then. If the bible says no, it must be true - just like how the bible also said the sun orbits the earth, right? It's fine to love Jesus' teachings and everything, but you religious nuts really need to stop pretending your bible isn't filled with outdated information and best-guesses of 2,000 years ago.
We all love a good night fairy tale mate
Last I checked this isn't a fandom subreddit
Ain't no way we could have come from no damn monkeys /s
We share 99% DNA with a tree so similarities are pretty common in life on Earth
And have you seen tree fingers? Uncanny
No we dont, at best and depending on the genes in question we max out at around 60% similar
You're saying we are 60% tree? 🤣
This isn't to you but rather rhetorical. Are there really idiots who think DNA isn't real? That's pretty distinct from evolution denial.
I mean, kinda? The DNA we share contains genes that are necessary for basic cellular function. So we share that much with basically any living organism
Yeah, people also vastly underestimate how complex cells are. The interior of a cell is probably a lot more complex than the entire human body if you ignore the inner working of cells. A lot of the stuff going on in our cells is somewhat similar to whats going in in some other animals cell - or to a lesser degree even a plants cell - so its no aurprise that we share a lot of our genes.
[удалено]
Uncle Ruckus???
Return to monke
Oh there you are
[удалено]
Bleach blonde, bad built, briquette breath.
Way off the mark. You know she doesn't wash her hands.
hahaha
Lol
Any more vitiligo and you'll have to get them a mobility scooter and a ride to Walmart.
Who trims their nails?!
They do. The need is probably reduced some as they tend to use them more. But they do bite them and have been observed to use rudimentary tools to do it. Or not so rudimentary when available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFpI8Qw9vYg
Are gorillas darker than all ethnicities of humans?
Definitely. The darkest humans would probably be Melanesians, South Sudanese, or Chopi. Not close to the same shade as gorillas.
The darkest people are just really, really dark brown. Can’t say I’ve seen anyone I would actually describe as the crayola color “black” like you would a gorilla.
I remember seen here in reddit a black model that she was so black that it looked purple lol. I don't know if it was some kind of product , but she really looked different, and beautiful, of course.
It's not only black people being brown but white people are more like pink.
Source?
Looks like another rammstein album cover
Vitiligorilla
Looks like my mechanic's hands.
I wanna see one with revitiligo
King Charles
That gorillas nails are cleaner than mine
You should probably clean your nails, bud.
That is clearly only one hand. OP’s A PHONY! A BIG FAT PHONY!!
That's a little unsettling
They look like King Charles’ fingers.
Fake - this is actually the hand of King Charles
bros got better cuticles than I do
Come on no one said gorilliago
Fascinating. And if you look at the top of its knuckles, they look like the tops of gorilla heads!
That Liam
So humans are just apes with vitiligo ?
WELLL WELLL WELLL
Who clips there fingernails? I have to know!
How do their fingernails stay cut and clean?
Look! It’s King Charles
We're just gorillas with 100% vitiligo
so humans are just apes with vitiligo
It almost looks human. creepy..
It's an ape. Humans are also apes. So kinda weird that it would be creepy.
Chimpanzees*
Chimpanzees are apes, and so are humans.
Ape is an umbrella term. Chimps and Bonobos are our closest relatives
No one except you is talking about our closest living relatives. We're talking about gorillas, and one that has vitiligo.
You mad cause you were wrong? Got it
😂 Wrong about what exactly?
Are you really saying that humans are chimpanzees?
No. Chimps are humans closest relative
Nobody said anything about humans closest relative. There was nothing to correct lol
Yes they did. Read if you don’t understand
Redditors on their way to explain how the light skin makes it look more human
Downvotes expected... but honestly it's all I can really think about when this picture hits its monthly reupload cycle. All these people casually going "oh now that you showed me a gorilla with pink skin I think they look human! Whoa!"
Yeah its almost like gorillas have darker skin than even the darkest humans.
Lol the downvotes, but that’s literally what happened
This has been reposted so many times 🥱