Is Inkorrekt, like all humans, an ape?

I don't think this is correct. "Apes" are in the order Primates, but not all primates are apes. From here: http://anthro.palomar.edu/primate/prim_7.htm For reference, here is the hierarchy from http://www.itis.usda.gov for Homo sapiens (with authorities and common names):Kingdom Animalia -- Animal, animals, animaux
Phylum Chordata -- chordates, cordado, cordés
Subphylum Vertebrata -- vertebrado, vertebrates, vertébrés
Class Mammalia Linnaeus, 1758 -- mamífero, mammals, mammifres
Subclass Theria Parker and Haswell, 1897
Infraclass Eutheria Gill, 1872
Order Primates Linnaeus, 1758 -- homem, macaco, primata, primates, primates, sagui
Family Hominidae Gray, 1825 -- man-like primates
Genus Homo Linnaeus, 1758 -- hominoids
Species Homo sapiens Linnaeus, 1758 -- human, man--
spelling error correctedThis message has been edited by Michael, 03-04-2006 09:57 AM

From here it seems that the superfamily Hominoidea is synonymous with "apes"--though they are a bit sloppy with the terminology at the top of the page. I will go ahead and insert this into the ITIS hierarchy. Note that they seem to be making a distinction between apes and humans however.Homo sapiens (with authorities and common names):Kingdom Animalia -- Animal, animals, animaux
Phylum Chordata -- chordates, cordado, cordés
Subphylum Vertebrata -- vertebrado, vertebrates, vertébrés
Class Mammalia Linnaeus, 1758 -- mamífero, mammals, mammifres
Subclass Theria Parker and Haswell, 1897
Infraclass Eutheria Gill, 1872
Order Primates Linnaeus, 1758 -- homem, macaco, primata, primates, primates, sagui
Superfamily Hominoidea -- apes and humans
Family Hominidae Gray, 1825 -- man-like primates
Genus Homo Linnaeus, 1758 -- hominoids
Species Homo sapiens Linnaeus, 1758 -- human, man--
Added by edit: This site also makes the distinction between apes and humans at the superfamily level.--
minor edit to edit madeThis message has been edited by Michael, 03-04-2006 10:26 AMThis message has been edited by Michael, 03-04-2006 10:28 AM

Agreed, it could be political. I am having a little trouble finding out how primatologists define "ape." I am also getting sidetracked along the way. A couple of sites talking of a "new" classification scheme for primates are here and (though not primary literature) here.This is fun, but got to get to work.Cheers.

I think it should go beyond this. Those in the science crowd who like to call creationists "apes" (in part, I think, because those people know it annoys the creationists so much) should refrain, unless a consensus can be found among primatologists that the term "ape" includes humans.Cheers.

I've seen a scheme that takes this further and reclassifies Pan as a subgenus of Homo. Do you know if this is being considered seriously by systematists?This seems to me to be on-topic.