Ooh, Chimpanzee That! Monkey News!

Status
Not open for further replies.

HolyCheck

I want a tag give me a tag
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/1018318/big-drinking-chimp-sent-to-rehab

A chimpanzee at a zoo in Russia has developed such a bad drinking and smoking problem that his handlers have sent him to rehab.

Zoo authorities said visitors frequently treated Zhora the chimp to alcohol and cigarettes until he developed a heavy addiction, according to Russian daily newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda.

The former circus performer even screamed and pestered passing zoo visitors to give him liquor.

Zhora has been a resident at the Rostov Zoo, 200km northeast of Moscow, for the past five years after being brought from the Tatarstan republic.

"We asked visitors not to give him (alcohol and cigarettes), but it was all in vain," Rostov Zoo deputy head Hope Yevtushenko was quoted as saying.

Although Zhora was kept behind three rows of fences, visitors managed to throw bottles and cigarettes at him, zoo workers said.

Visitors reportedly found it amusing to watch Zhora open a bottle of beer, drink it and then the empty bottle back into the crowd.

"People laugh when they see an animal drinking (alcohol) and smoking, but vicious habits damage (the animal's) health, and many do not understand this," zoo workers were quoted saying.

The chimp has now been sent to a rehab facility in the city of Kazan, where it is suffering from "exhaustion", veterinarians said.

DON'T BE STUPID KARL. MONKEYS CANT DO THAT.
Ricky let him finish.
Turns out it was another load of monkeys from another part of the island...from the rough bit...


monkey_smoking_1a.jpg
 
"So there was this little monkey, right, and he liked smokin a fag and havin a whiskey and that"
"karl, you're talking absolute bollocks"
 
Chimps, gorillas and orangutans are apes, not monkeys.
They have no tails, they're larger than monkeys, and more intelligent and genetically closer to man.
 
DonMigs85 said:
Chimps, gorillas and orangutans are apes, not monkeys.
They have no tails, they're larger than monkeys, and more intelligent and genetically closer to man.


i didnt come from no monkey
 
Atramental said:
A chimp is a type of primate. Monkey is a colloquial term.
DonMigs85 said:
Chimps, gorillas and orangutans are apes, not monkeys.
They have no tails, they're larger than monkeys, and more intelligent and genetically closer to man.
That was the sound of a monkey flying a fighter jet over your head at 20,000 feet.


/right, because there was a lot of nuts being eaten in the cockpit and that.

Syth_Blade22 said:
This thread is turning into spot the American...

Seriously.
 
DonMigs85 said:
Chimps, gorillas and orangutans are apes, not monkeys.
They have no tails, they're larger than monkeys, and more intelligent and genetically closer to man.

And apes are a subtype of monkeys.

Anyway, wonder if they're gonna use nicotine patches.
 
Raist said:
And apes are a subtype of monkeys.

Anyway, wonder if they're gonna use nicotine patches.
Actually apes and monkeys are distinct branches of the primate family, in addition to prosimians.
OH GOD WHY AM I SAYING ALL THIS

"Everything the light touches is our Kingdom."

15713_1256970193300_1500968636_30855196_7123015_n.jpg
 
Oh by the way, several other chimps have been known to smoke and booze. It was on that show "Max X" a few years ago.
There was also a camel who chugged a whole bottle of wine.
 
Seth C said:
I really hope this is a joke.

It's not. Went through that debate not so long ago :I
To make it short, "monkey" should be not used as a classification term at all if it makes the distinction between some primates and others. There's absolutely no valid reason for that. Paraphyletic groups suck.
 
Raist said:
It's not. Went through that debate not so long ago :I
To make it short, "monkey" should be not used as a classification term at all if it makes the distinction between some primates and others. There's absolutely no valid reason for that. Paraphyletic groups suck.
Trukk not munky
 
Raist said:
It's not. Went through that debate not so long ago :I
To make it short, "monkey" should be not used as a classification term at all if it makes the distinction between some primates and others. There's absolutely no valid reason for that. Paraphyletic groups suck.
You all need to shut up and let the monkey news continue unabated.
 
Raist said:
It's not. Went through that debate not so long ago :I
To make it short, "monkey" should be not used as a classification term at all if it makes the distinction between some primates and others. There's absolutely no valid reason for that. Paraphyletic groups suck.

Either you don't understand what a paraphyletic group is, or you aren't familiar with the classifications given the various primates. Apes are not a subtype of monkeys, nor is the last common ancestor of the two a monkey OR an ape.
 
ItAintEasyBeinCheesy said:
What the fuck is up with Russians taking alcohol to the Zoo, is it that boring?

Had I not had to go all anthropologist in here, that was what stood out to me also. Who brings liquor to a zoo? What kind of zoo even allows alcohol?
 
You know what? The poor guy has to live in a cage his whole life whilst being stared at by strangers.

I say let the fucker drink.
 
DonMig95 said:
They have no tails

There are tail-less monkeys.

Seth C said:
Either you don't understand what a paraphyletic group is, or you aren't familiar with the classifications given the various primates. Apes are not a subtype of monkeys, nor is the last common ancestor of the two a monkey OR an ape.

I know exactly what a paraphyletic group is, thank you. "Monkeys" IS a paraphyletic group. And no, the latest common ancestor was obviously not an ape. The common ancestor of old world monkeys and apes was a monkey. It can't be anything else.
This kind of classifications (still used by many primatologists and anthropologists) makes no sense.
 
Raist said:
There are tail-less monkeys.



I know exactly what a paraphyletic group is, thank you. "Monkeys" IS a paraphyletic group. And no, the latest common ancestor was obviously not an ape. The common ancestor of old world monkeys and apes was a monkey. It can't be anything else.
This kind of classifications (still used by many primatologists and anthropologists) makes no sense.
Aren't the great apes classified as Hominids along with humans?
 
Raist said:
There are tail-less monkeys.



I know exactly what a paraphyletic group is, thank you. "Monkeys" IS a paraphyletic group. And no, the latest common ancestor was obviously not an ape. The common ancestor of old world monkeys and apes was a monkey. It can't be anything else.
This kind of classifications (still used by many primatologists and anthropologists) makes no sense.

The last common ancestor (thought to be Darwinius masillae right now) of all primates is more closely related to the pro-simians than either ape or monkey, currently considered part of the family extinct family Notharctidae, infraorder Adapiformes. It is not a monkey, nor is it an ape.

Believe it or not, how Raist feels things should be, doesn't supersede scientific consensus. The last common ancestor of apes and monkeys is not considered or labeled, by scientists, a monkey.
 
Raist said:
And apes are a subtype of monkeys.

Anyway, wonder if they're gonna use nicotine patches.
no, apes and monkeys are subsets of vaguely tree shrewish things.

Raist said:
I know exactly what a paraphyletic group is, thank you. "Monkeys" IS a paraphyletic group. And no, the latest common ancestor was obviously not an ape. The common ancestor of old world monkeys and apes was a monkey. It can't be anything else.
wrong, the last common anscestor or old and new world monkey groups post date the common ancestor between apes and old world monkeys and ape/old words and new world monkeys.

there is no direct relationship between existent the common ancestors of old and new world monkeys., the names were given solely for apparent convergent traits and not due to evolutionary histories. the problem easily solves itself when you switch away from using the common name.
 
Seth C said:
The last common ancestor (thought to be Darwinius masillae right now) of all primates is more closely related to the pro-simians than either ape or monkey, currently considered part of the family extinct family Notharctidae, infraorder Adapiformes. It is not a monkey, nor is it an ape.

Believe it or not, how Raist feels things should be, doesn't supersede scientific consensus. The last common ancestor of apes and monkeys is not considered or labeled, by scientists, a monkey.

Of course the oldest ancestor of all primates is not a monkey... it was a primate.
New world monkeys branched out before old world monkeys and apes diverged. So explain how our common ancestor with old world monkeys wasn't a monkey itself.
NW, OW and Apes form the simiiformes. Simians. You do know it means monkey in latin right?

Darwinius massilae is much older than the first monkeys. The oldest known common ancestor for all monkeys is Aphidium phiomense. And it is a monkey.

Pandaman said:
wrong, the last common anscestor or old and new world monkey groups post date the common ancestor between apes and old world monkeys and ape/old words and new world monkeys.

Wait. Are you saying that apes diverged from the rest before old and new world monkeys diverged?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom