anonymous
  • anonymous
Which of the following best describes the evolutionary relationship between modern humans and chimpanzees? Answers Humans descended from apes, while chimpanzees evolved from a different, more primitive ancestor. Humans and chimpanzees are both primates that diverged from primitive common ancestors. Humans descended from chimpanzees and therefore have the same evolutionary ancestors. Humans evolved independently of chimpanzees and do not share a common ancestor.
Biology
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
chestercat
  • chestercat
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
Here's a handy tree to show you how humans and chimps are related: http://uglicoyote.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/primatephylogeny.jpg
anonymous
  • anonymous
the belief is that humans and chimps were from common ancestry... though we both have the same amount of chromosomes.
anonymous
  • anonymous
and your picture supports that.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.

More answers

anonymous
  • anonymous
according to anthropologists etc.. we all share the same common ancestry way back .. like homo erectus or something.. maybe homo aferensis
anonymous
  • anonymous
I'm pretty sure chimps branched off long before Homo erectus... Basically, around 5-6 million years ago, a population of some sort of (probably) African primate divided into two groups. One of those groups went on to become chimpanzees, and the other group went on to become humans (through a variety of stages, with plenty of smaller populations of human-like animals splitting off at various times and then going extinct.)
anonymous
  • anonymous
The chart doesn't help.
anonymous
  • anonymous
It should.
anonymous
  • anonymous
homo erectus was one of the few i remember from my human origins class :)
anonymous
  • anonymous
I'm so confused...how do I find the correct answer? Not to be rude.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Is it C?
anonymous
  • anonymous
humans did not descend from chimps.
anonymous
  • anonymous
Homo erectus lived a couple of million years ago, I think, and was either directly on the evolutionary line that eventually became humans or was on a side branch off that line. Our ancestors somehow became separated from the ancestors of chimps 5-6 million years ago. Before that, we had a common ancestor.
anonymous
  • anonymous
if you look at your picture.. you can solve this problem. see the pictures on the top.. lemurs to humans? now look at the paths leading off of the pictures.. this shows where each came from. the numbers on the side are years ago. so.. the longer then number of years ago the less species.. so look at your answers.. which makes sense.. strictly according to the picture?
anonymous
  • anonymous
B?
anonymous
  • anonymous
would be my guess.. my next question is why they chose that naked lady for the human representation. i guess they could have put a loin cloth on her or something.
anonymous
  • anonymous
They drew all the other animals naked too.
anonymous
  • anonymous
lol.. well .. animals dont typically wear clothing :)
anonymous
  • anonymous
lol
anonymous
  • anonymous
Thanks guys...sorry I didn't get it.
anonymous
  • anonymous
At first
anonymous
  • anonymous
no problem. good luck :)
anonymous
  • anonymous
I think it's just an old tradition... a lot of medical and science books represent generic human beings with either a naked man or a naked woman. Most illustrations of parasite life cycles in my books involve drawings of naked people. Not sure why they do it, but it could be to show the anatomy (e.g. when emphasising the similarities between humans and primates) and/or to avoid clothing being a distraction. Keep in mind how fast fashions change, and how much a person's clothing can say about him/her.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.