4 ms·

Last I checked I thought we were more closely related to primates not monkeys--not sure if that's of any significance.

• i80and 12y ago
  Apes, I think you mean; both apes and monkeys are primates.
• tejon 12y ago
  Monkeys are primates. Oh, let's see if I can remember the main groupings... Primates -> > Lower Primates -> > > Tarsiers > > Aye-Ayes > > Lorises > Lemurs & Red Pandas > Simians -> > > New World Monkeys > > Old World Monkeys > Hominoids -> > > Gibbons & Siamangs > > Great Apes -> > > > Orangutans > > > Gorillas > > > Chimpanzees -> > > > > Chimpanzee > > > > Bonobo > > > > Humans
  • Crito 12y ago
    Wiki has humans and chimpanzees/bonobos in different subtribes, so humans wouldn't be under "Chimpanzees ->": Tribe Hominini Subtribe Panina Genus Pan Chimpanzee (common chimpanzee), Pan troglodytes Central chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes troglodytes Western chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes verus Nigeria-Cameroon chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes ellioti Eastern chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii Bonobo (pygmy chimpanzee), Pan paniscus Subtribe Hominina Genus Homo Human, Homo sapiens Anatomically modern human, Homo sapiens sapiens
    • tejon 12y ago
      Yeah, it's not the mainstream classification but it's been proposed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Chimpanzee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Chimpanzee) and I find it entertaining. So. ;)
      • lotsofmangos 12y ago
        I particularly like Pans Narrans as a classification. Though I suspect that Pans Superbia might be unfortunately closer to the mark.