Apes evolving from canids, rather than monkeys.

[Dremmer]

http://www.evolutionem.co.uk/page8.html

This guy believes that apes didn't really evolve from monkeys, but canids, and that similarities between apes and monkeys is only do to convergent evolution.

I don't really believe this, but it is an interesting idea.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

This websites full of crackpottery IMHO. Reading through the about section and a few of the articles they are full of statements along the lines of "taking the first fresh look at evolution since Darwin". That tells you all you need to know really, if they believe that evolutionary biology hasn't changed since Darwin then they really haven't studied the topic.

Until I see some published research in an evolution journal rather than some website I'm not buying it

 

[Vagn]

http://www.evolutionem.co.uk/page8.html

This guy believes that apes didn't really evolve from monkeys, but canids, and that similarities between apes and monkeys is only do to convergent evolution.

I don't really believe this, but it is an interesting idea.

Convergent evolution doesn't lead to genetic similarity though does it? How would he explain the fact that apes are genetically closer to monkeys than canids?

 

[epenguin]

Where are the DNA sequence comparisons? It was heroic in its time, though not without a fraction of uncertainty, dispute and error, to have reconstructed evolutionary pathways with only anatomical resemblance and fossil studies to go on but now, although such disappearing expertise is still of value it is completely stupid to do anything without DNA comparisons.

In your abstract I don't see them even mentioned. Until I hear otherwise I would dismiss this.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The only mention of any kind of genetics is this section

The genome of humans and wolves (Canis Lupus) have been mapped and now await detailed comparison. When other primates are also mapped I believe it will be possible to confirm the canid to ape evolutionary route.

Already some genes appear to be unique between canids and apes.

Genes associated with the regulation of transcription in embryonic cells produce HMGA proteins. These genes should cease activity of expression in adult tissues but in cases where they are still expressed, cancerous tumours are often associated with these proteins. So it appears that an error in the mechanism of gene control during development occurred at the canid stage - as apes (humans) and dogs both share the same types of cancer - such as thyroid, prostatic, pancreatic, uterine cervical and colorectal cancer. (H. Murua Escobar et al, 20005).

The fact that canids and apes have similar cancers is hardly genetic evidence, we're both mammals! The fact that the author made the statement "I believe" before seeing any evidence tells you a lot

 

[mishrashubham]

Many aspects of canid behaviour are similar to ours.
We chose alpha males for our leaders and show similar obedience to their commands and dictates.
We show social cohesion among groups; hunting dogs provide food for the injured and the aged.
Dogs in general show many emotions, compassion, jealousy, rivalry which no other mammal other than apes show with such intensity.

Many social mammals display these characteristics, be it lions, elephants, dolphins etc. Existence of alpha males and things like jealousy and rivalry are common behaviours observed in these animals. That does not mean humans are closely related to them.

 

[Ken Natton]

In full recognition of my status as complete layman, and all the qualifications that puts on whatever I may say, I am prepared to make a much more direct statement about the paper referred to in the original post.

Firstly on the matter of convergent evolution, it is clear that convergent evolution does happen and is an important phenomenon to grasp. Good (and yes, obvious) genuine examples of convergent evolution would include bat flight. The very nature of the equipment that gives a bat its ability to fly is sufficiently different from that of birds that it is in itself an easy-to-spot demonstration of the notion that it was something that evolved entirely independently. But the real point is that bats are mammals and most mammals do not fly. Thus bat’s divergence from birds in the phylogenetic tree lies further back than its evolution of the ability to fly. This is what makes it an easy and obvious genuine demonstration of what convergent evolution is.

The extent of the simple morphological similarities between apes and monkeys is the easy-to-spot demonstration of the high likelihood of their (relatively) recent divergence on the phylogenetic tree. Even for a layman who has conducted no serious research, it should not come as a surprise to learn that DNA sequencing evidence supports this notion.

Again, there are some fairly easy points to identify that would tend to evidence against the notion of recent divergence on the phylogenetic tree for wolves and apes. Absence of morphological similarities would be one, but perhaps more tellingly, so would be the fact that wolves are carnivorous and the weight of evidence is that ape ancestral heritage was entirely herbivorous.

So, undoubtedly, the fact that apes and wolves are both mammals is strong evidence that they do have a common ancestor (note, not the same thing as saying that one evolved from the other). But there is a lot of easy to identify evidence that the divergence of apes and monkeys on the phylogenetic tree is much more recent than that of wolves and apes.

So, layman as I am, I have no problem making a more direct assertion about that paper. It is utter twaddle.

 

[DavidMcC]

All I can say is that the proposer of this strange hypothesis must have had a keen sense of smell and a nasty bark!

 

[bobze]

All I can say is that the proposer of this strange hypothesis must have had a keen sense of smell and a nasty bark!

Or a lot of LSD, boy the possibilities LSD opens up!

 

[mishrashubham]

Or a lot of LSD, boy the possibilities LSD opens up!

You mean he hallucinated about the ghosts of his canine ancestors telling him to showl the world the truth?

 

[bobze]

You mean he hallucinated about the ghosts of his canine ancestors telling him to showl the world the truth?

No, no no. Peyote is what makes you see ancestral ghost canid spirit guides. LSD makes you see ancient gene manipulating aliens.