FNP: SCIENTISTS SEE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK

Faux News Press (FNP)_Washington, DC:

A small but growing segment of the scientists specializing in Physical Anthropology, Forensic Anthropology, Comparative Anatomy, Evolutionary Biology, Ethnology, Gene Ontology, and Sociology and Unified Cultural Speciology believe that “man” and “ape” are essentially the same thing. Therefore, they believe that modern taxonomy should reflect this likeness, as opposed to distinctions. This movement generally deplores human ethnocentrism as “bad science” and essentially “racist.”

“Lookee,” said Professor Morris Goodman of Wayne State University’s School of Medicine in Detroit, “Humans are like 2010 Mercedes Benz, while chimps are like 2007 models. We are basically the same car.”

Professor Goodman led a team of scientists who analyzed published sequences of 97 genes on six “apes,” including chimps, gorillas, orangutans and man. These researchers discovered that 99.4 % of the key DNA sites (collectively, 90,000 base pairs – “genetic letters”) that code for proteins were shared among humans and chimps. The other apes are almost as close. The logical implication of his data is that there is only one true “Homo.” All should be placed in the same Genus, whether it is termed “Homo” or “Pan.”

Among contemporary, living apes only humans are placed in the category of “Homo.” This has been the case since modern taxonomy was defined by the famous Swedish scientist, Carl Linnaeus, in Systemae Naturae, published in 1735. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach had proposed a new taxonomy in 1795, but it retained Linnaeus’ human priority and distinction from the Ape category.

Georgetown University Professor Stanley Blatzberg-Harriman has drolly categorized these early taxonomists as “jive-turkey Europeans.”

On occasion FNP has noted articles carried by other news media in which the suggestion was made that chimps and man be classified as “Homo.” The logic of such articles seemed to be that chimps should not be incarcerated in zoos, but rather these “brothers” should be attending usual human institutions such as churches, synagogues, lodges, schools, et cetera. There should be equal opportunity for all humans (or apes) in the workplace, and they should have equal access to public facilities.

“Separate-but-equal concepts of law among humans has been declared unconstitutional,” declared Professor Amery Stern-Morgan of Harvard University’s School of Law. “Should scientists determine that chimps and other apes share 99.4% of the same DNA architecture as humans, what court would deny their humanity?”

According to FNP’s researcher on this issue, the figure of 99.4% shared genes, used by the Goodman team, differed from other studies.

For example, the Roy J. Brutten team, using a different approach, arrived at a figure of 95% correspondence between chimp and human genomes. Still another study by Tatsuya Ansai and his team, again using a different approach, arrived at 86.7% correspondence. Still, other media have used the figure of 97%, when featuring this issue.

For our readers to better understand this problem, FNP offers a caveat. When Linnaeus created his taxonomy, he used the word “species,” which was derived from the Latin word for “to see.” Hence, what was visible to the eye as a significant difference became a defining categorical niche. However, in private Linnaeus apparently questioned his own division of Man from Ape. One reason for his decision was “fear of clergy.”

Clearly, the issue of difference would be argued, due to its subjectivity, even when facts were set forth to offer justification. Due to human bias, this had a prevailing effect of human ethnocentrism and superiority.

However, when the technology advanced in optics, et al, to see “the world within,” opinion among scientists began to radically drift away from ordinary humans. They immersed themselves in an otherwise “strange land.” Their predominant link to the ordinary human’s world became weaker and more tenuous. A kind of contempt for the “vulgarity” of every-day people arose.



Scientist, such as Professor Irv Davis of Stanford University, proclaimed that the distinction between humans and chimps was basically “cultural.” He stated, “Maybe if the chimps would send us a Peace Corps, humans could be uplifted from their vain modes of thinking. At Stanford we are attempting to develop a chimp pedagogy specifically trained to teach humans.”

Famed British physicist, Richard Dawkins, decried the “discontinuous mind” which tries to impose inflexible, inaccurate definitions to non-discreet phenomena. “How,” he wondered, “Can science accept a decorative distinction between waffles and pancakes as permanent?”

FNP reports, but our function does not include defining forms of life. If a chimp becomes a governor or senator, we will judge him by his deeds – not by whether he has “poster boy” good-looks or comes from a rich family. As the poet Robert Burns wrote: “A man’s a man for all that.” FNP might well add: “An ape’s an ape for all that.”