Wrong, NERD
Monkey is a common usage synonym for simian, and recently the scientific community has acknowledged that the carve out of apes from the term simply is not defensible cladistically.
In truth it was almost assuredly a reaction to creationist bitching about being “descended from monkeys” and experts are simply now accepting that humanity isn’t that special and those idiots would bitch regardless.
According to that logic, it would never be possible be evolve out of a clade which is totally true. By definition it’s impossible to evolve out of a clade so if monkeys are a clade, we belong to it as well.
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as a “monkey”, is in fact, a simian, or as I’ve recently taken to calling them, “higher primates”…
The Fall of Unidan
Here’s the thing. You said a “chimpanzee is a monkey.”
Is it in the same infraorder? Yes. No one’s arguing that.
As someone who is a scientist who studies monkeys, I am telling you, specifically, in science, no one calls chimpanzees monkeys. If you want to be “specific” like you said, then you shouldn’t either. They’re not the same thing.
If you’re saying “monkey infraorder” you’re referring to the taxonomic grouping of Simiiformes, which includes things from lemurs to librarians to humans.
So your reasoning for calling a chimpanzee a monkey is because random people “call the monkey-shaped ones monkeys?” Let’s get raccoons and koalas in there, then, too.
Also, calling someone a jackdaw or a crow? It’s not one or the other, that’s not how taxonomy works. They’re both. A chimpanzee is a chimpanzee and a member of the monkey infraorder. But that’s not what you said. You said a chimpanzee is a monkey, which is not true unless you’re okay with calling all members of the monkey infraorder monkeys, which means you’d call librarians, humans, and other apes monkeys, too. Which you said you don’t.
It’s okay to just admit you’re wrong, you know?
Subjectively*
well that’s just, like, your opinion, man
