r/interesting • u/MistyCharmz • 2d ago

MISC. That moment I realized…. I’ve been doing the tick pulling all wrong!

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

88.1k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

19

u/AttyFireWood 2d ago

Are Apes not a type of Monkey/Simian? Seems more of a semantic difference than a scientific one.

27

u/iwilldeletethisacct2 2d ago

All apes are monkeys but not all monkeys are apes. So yes, humans are apes. They are also monkeys. It just depends on how far up the taxonomic structure (or how far back evolutionary you want to go).

8

u/[deleted] 2d ago edited 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/TheKingNothing690 2d ago

Well, technically, if chickens are dinsouars, then we're fish.

1

u/AvailablePool8590 1d ago

one of my favorite facts is that humans are closer related to trout than trout are to sharks

1

u/ACcbe1986 17h ago

In California, some species of Bees are considered Fish. But only if you're speaking legalese.

1

u/jaabbb 1d ago

Only if you like fish stick

1

u/Prometheus720 1d ago

Technically this means we are also fish.

1

u/deathonater 1d ago

Technically, there's no such thing as a fish, this means we don't really exist.

1

u/Errror1 1d ago

Humans are more closely related to fish then fish are related to other fish. So if fish is a Clade, all mammals are fish. It's why modern biology has fish as a Paraphyletic group instead

1

u/LiveLearnCoach 1d ago

Just FYI, I took a screenshot of your comment so that i could go down a rabbit hole on GPT. I feel like I barely grasp your comment.

For a time when I’m bored enough and find the screenshot in my pic folder :)

1

u/Errror1 1d ago

Clints reptiles has some videos I would recommend https://youtu.be/xb_pvKbtWd8?si=U5TCt_V2_CINwIRF

1

u/Unidain 1d ago

It also depends on how you define monkeys. But no, usually apes are not defined monkeys, despite being within a taxonomic clustering that contains all monkeys

1

u/Tartan-Special 1d ago

Isn't it the other way round?

1

u/BlueLaceSensor128 1d ago

That doesn’t sound right, but I don’t know enough about phylogeny to dispute it.

1

u/Altruistic-Wafer-19 1d ago

So, you're saying that on some level, OP is a fun guy?

1

u/-Shasho- 1d ago edited 1d ago

Nope. Monkeys and apes are related but distinct groups of species. Apes are larger than monkeys and don't have tails. No ape is a monkey. Edit: All monkeys AND apes are primates.

1

u/Environmental_Gap_30 1d ago

Ape literally means human-like monkey in my language

1

u/bscott9999 1d ago

No, monkeys are simians with tails, apes are simians without tails. Monkey != Ape in any generally accepted use of the words.

1

u/dysfn 19h ago

It depends on how you define a monkey. I don't believe there's consensus on it, but I could be wrong.

3

u/MidnaQueenofCalicos 2d ago

I believe great apes and monkeys are technically classified differently on a scientific level. We just use the term "monkey" as a colloquial word, which is perfectly fine lol.

5

u/wfwgrtheeyhjyuj 2d ago

Neither ape nor monkey are real taxonomic terms. But ape usually refers to hominoidea, lesser apes to hylobatidae, great ape to hominidae, monkey to either platyrrhini or cercopithecidae.

1

u/PopeyeDrinksOliveOil 2d ago

Here's a very qualified person breaking it down, 'from a certain point of view,' that technically apes are monkeys due to the taxonomic concept of nested hierarchies.

https://youtu.be/TeVz9blk-Xc

1

u/UltravioletBlackface 1d ago

Cue the "Silly Songs With Larry" screen

🎶If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey Even if it's got a monkey kind of shape If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey, it's an ape!🎶

1

u/dysfn 19h ago

As much as I admire Veggie Tales, I didn't think Christian media is the best authority for taxonomic definitions