<story><title>Opinion: Another species of hominin may still be alive</title><url>https://www.the-scientist.com/magazine-issue/opinion-another-species-of-hominin-may-still-be-alive-69869</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>codeflo</author><text>&amp;gt; In contrast, evolutionary theory puts humans (or hominins) last, just as does the biblical story of Genesis. Yet in all instances, the position confers on  Homo sapiens a unique status, thereby separating us from the rest of the animal kingdom.&lt;p&gt;Ha ha ha, no. That’s a wild misunderstanding of evolutionary theory, that humans are somehow “more evolved” than other current species. Modern apes are our siblings, not our ancestors. And nothing fundamental “separates” us from other animals: we’re yet another species, granted with some unique features that we ourselves consider very important.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mcv</author><text>It&amp;#x27;s also incorrect about the biblical story of Genesis. Because Genesis contains two creation stories (though biblical literalists prefer to brush away that fact).&lt;p&gt;Quoting a bit more from the article:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;Like other folk zoologists, the Lio put humans first, most notably as the origin of nonhuman animals, a sort of Darwinism in reverse. In contrast, evolutionary theory puts humans (or hominins) last, just as does the biblical story of Genesis.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Genesis 1 indeed puts humans last, but Genesis 2 puts them first. And Genesis 2 is the older story of the two. Maybe that explains why it&amp;#x27;s more in line with those folk zoologists? Genesis 1 (a poem, structured by the days of the week) was written later, possibly during the Babylonian exile, and may be more informed by the science of the Babylonians; it addresses not just the creation of the Earth and the creatures on it, but also the sun and stars, and the passage of time; topics that the Babylonians were very interested in.</text></comment>
<story><title>Opinion: Another species of hominin may still be alive</title><url>https://www.the-scientist.com/magazine-issue/opinion-another-species-of-hominin-may-still-be-alive-69869</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>codeflo</author><text>&amp;gt; In contrast, evolutionary theory puts humans (or hominins) last, just as does the biblical story of Genesis. Yet in all instances, the position confers on  Homo sapiens a unique status, thereby separating us from the rest of the animal kingdom.&lt;p&gt;Ha ha ha, no. That’s a wild misunderstanding of evolutionary theory, that humans are somehow “more evolved” than other current species. Modern apes are our siblings, not our ancestors. And nothing fundamental “separates” us from other animals: we’re yet another species, granted with some unique features that we ourselves consider very important.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>warent</author><text>This argument is always really odd to me. You&amp;#x27;ll hear people say things like &amp;quot;if evolution is real then why are there still monkeys?&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;As if anyone is claiming we&amp;#x27;re derived from modern chimps...&lt;p&gt;Meanwhile the ancient apes that we share as common ancestors with modern apes are long extinct.&lt;p&gt;Not to mention evolution doesn&amp;#x27;t require an extinction as far as I know. See polar bears</text></comment>