>>13715865As "apes" is usually defined, no. For all practical purposes, yeah, pretty much.
>>13715875>No, evolution is not real.For OP's question, that does not matter. Unless you say that species do not exist, or that they cannot be grouped morphological. Wolves and foxes are canines, for example, whether you accept that they evolved from a common ancestor or not.
>We have nothing to do with apes.We are biologically very, very similar to them. Do they "have anything to do" with each other? Are chimps and gorillas both "apes?" If the group is valid, and it obviously is, then however the group came to exist, you can discuss whether a species is a part of it.
