<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Our Closest Relative</title>
	<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/</link>
	<description>se wo were fi na wosan kofa a yenki</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:53:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-146717</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:21:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-146717</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,2093001,00.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;More evidence in favor of orangutans, from the way we walk.&lt;/a&gt;  Naturally, the rebuttal is, "But, but, 2% genetic difference!"</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,2093001,00.html" rel="nofollow">More evidence in favor of orangutans, from the way we walk.</a>  Naturally, the rebuttal is, &#8220;But, but, 2% genetic difference!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Anthropik Network</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-90044</link>
		<dc:creator>The Anthropik Network</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-90044</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Goodall&#8217;s Bananas&lt;/strong&gt;

Jane Goodall turned our understanding of chimpanzees upside down.  From her unprecedented observations, we've taken the view of chimpanzees as violent and domineering, a view that's been used to proffer up the perspective that humans, too, are by nat...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Goodall&#8217;s Bananas</strong></p>
<p>Jane Goodall turned our understanding of chimpanzees upside down.  From her unprecedented observations, we&#8217;ve taken the view of chimpanzees as violent and domineering, a view that&#8217;s been used to proffer up the perspective that humans, too, are by nat&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DigitalDjigit</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-7916</link>
		<dc:creator>DigitalDjigit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2006 14:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-7916</guid>
		<description>Check out the latest issue of Harper's magazine.  It has an article on this very topic.  A lot of these behaviors even in primates seem to be cultural and even very violent groups become peaceful in certain circumstances.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Check out the latest issue of Harper&#8217;s magazine.  It has an article on this very topic.  A lot of these behaviors even in primates seem to be cultural and even very violent groups become peaceful in certain circumstances.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6933</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:39:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6933</guid>
		<description>That may be more plausible ... or it could be that there's a lot more to genetics than we assume, and genetic evidence alone should not be sufficient to close the debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That may be more plausible &#8230; or it could be that there&#8217;s a lot more to genetics than we assume, and genetic evidence alone should not be sufficient to close the debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Wordsworth</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6914</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Wordsworth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2006 08:24:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6914</guid>
		<description>Another posibility is there is somthing in orangutans or there asian enviroment, that leads to them acumulating genetic mutations faster than the other apes and humans. Making the genetic date of the last comon ancestor of orangutans and humans apear futher back than it is.

Stephen Wordsworth</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another posibility is there is somthing in orangutans or there asian enviroment, that leads to them acumulating genetic mutations faster than the other apes and humans. Making the genetic date of the last comon ancestor of orangutans and humans apear futher back than it is.</p>
<p>Stephen Wordsworth</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6906</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2006 03:17:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6906</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Perhaps the explanation for Orangs sharing features that chimps dont is that these feature were shared by the comon ancestor but chimps lost them, while the oranutang share a comon ancestor with humans futher back it is not imposible for them to keep traits longer.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

That's possible, but fairly convoluted.  Ockham's Razor and all.  Schwartz's theory explains it just in terms of orangs being our closest relative; yours needs to introduce another element, that chimps lost all of these traits, while we lost none of them.  Remember, this isn't just one or two traits, there's many of them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Perhaps the explanation for Orangs sharing features that chimps dont is that these feature were shared by the comon ancestor but chimps lost them, while the oranutang share a comon ancestor with humans futher back it is not imposible for them to keep traits longer.</p></blockquote>
<p>That&#8217;s possible, but fairly convoluted.  Ockham&#8217;s Razor and all.  Schwartz&#8217;s theory explains it just in terms of orangs being our closest relative; yours needs to introduce another element, that chimps lost all of these traits, while we lost none of them.  Remember, this isn&#8217;t just one or two traits, there&#8217;s many of them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryvr</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6891</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryvr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Mar 2006 04:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6891</guid>
		<description>I get too jealous to think about chimpanzees, bonobos, or orangutans rationally. All I can think about is I wish they were the ones pressured to trade green papers for their food, wear shoes, etc., and I were the one who could live in the jungle with my own kind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I get too jealous to think about chimpanzees, bonobos, or orangutans rationally. All I can think about is I wish they were the ones pressured to trade green papers for their food, wear shoes, etc., and I were the one who could live in the jungle with my own kind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Wordsworth</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6872</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Wordsworth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Mar 2006 05:22:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6872</guid>
		<description>Perhaps the explanation for Orangs sharing features that chimps dont is that these feature were shared by the comon ancestor but chimps lost them, while the oranutang share a comon ancestor with humans futher back it is not imposible for them to keep traits longer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps the explanation for Orangs sharing features that chimps dont is that these feature were shared by the comon ancestor but chimps lost them, while the oranutang share a comon ancestor with humans futher back it is not imposible for them to keep traits longer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Godesky</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6854</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Godesky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2006 22:59:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6854</guid>
		<description>Who says rape doesn't happen in primitive societies?  It most certainly does--just not at the endemic levels we see in civilization.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who says rape doesn&#8217;t happen in primitive societies?  It most certainly does&#8211;just not at the endemic levels we see in civilization.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quizzie</title>
		<link>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6852</link>
		<dc:creator>Quizzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2006 22:51:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://anthropik.com/2006/03/our-closest-relative/#comment-6852</guid>
		<description>Don't you dismiss rape too hastely as a behaviour that happens mainly in civilized societies, like war? It must give a very meaningful competitive advantage which might overwhelm possible disadvantages. Is it accepted in some primitive societies?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t you dismiss rape too hastely as a behaviour that happens mainly in civilized societies, like war? It must give a very meaningful competitive advantage which might overwhelm possible disadvantages. Is it accepted in some primitive societies?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
