Humans and chimps: the cultural link…

Memo to the (‘Young Earther’) Minister of Culture at Stormont from Hit and Run:

Historically, scientists believed that behavioural differences between colonies of chimpanzees were due to variations in genetics. A team at Liverpool, however, has now discovered that variations in behaviour are down to chimpanzees migrating to other colonies, proving that they build their ‘cultures’ in a similar way to humans.

, ,

  • yep

    So what you are saying is science had a theory about something but new research has shown that theory to be incorrect? πŸ˜‰

  • Mick Fealty

    Yep. See Kuhn, ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’.

  • Greenflag

    ‘A team at Liverpool, however, has now discovered that variations in behaviour are down to chimpanzees migrating to other colonies,’

    So it takes a Liverpudlian research team to tell us that for chimps as well as for homo sapiens that ‘when in Rome do as the Romans’.

    I think I may have heard that one before πŸ™‚

    Chimpanzees as we all know have several times more genetic variation than homo sapiens having been around for several million years as opposed to our 150,000 years or so . Can’t imagine how different the behaviours of tribes of chimps would be from each other ?

  • Siphonophore

    yep,

    So what you are saying is science had a theory about something but new research has shown that theory to be incorrect? πŸ˜‰

    No, some scientists had a hypothesis that chimpanzee culture was genetically heritable. Other researchers had proposed the alternate hypothesis that the variation in chimpanzee culture was passed on from one chimp to another. Research has revealed the former hypothesis does not explain all chimp culture and the latter hypothesis has been bolstered with evidence. The latter hypothesis may now start the graduation process to becoming a theory.

    Science has specific definitions for hypothesis and theory, the general public conflates the two and hence the false sophistry of the creationist bunch. Creationism is a hypothesis because it does not have empirical evidence supporting it, evolution is a theory because it does.

  • Danny O’Connor

    Sorry but there is no evidence in the fossil records for any missing links. we Man Utd fans have always been more intelligent than chelsea fans – not evolution -common sense.

  • Greenflag

    ‘Sorry but there is no evidence in the fossil records for any missing links.’

    ???? Fossils are extremely rare . Of the tens of billions of living creatures and plants which have been on the earth since life began ony a tiny number ever make it to ‘fossil’ status . In probably 99.999999999999% of ‘deaths’ the carcass serves as a meal for predators or even members of the same species or decomposes on the surface . Of the 0.00000000000000000000000000000001 % that become fossils they have to ensure that they die at the correct location and are not consumed before geological upheaval and sedimentary lay down can work the million years long process that ends with a ‘fossil’

    The more I hear of the ‘common sense ‘ arguments put forwared by opponents of evolution the more I’m inclined to admit that they may have a point πŸ™