The only evidence required for classification is a set of characteristics.
Once again, that is opinion based upon presupposition. And further, that presupposition insinuates an ancestral relationship without empirical scientific, logical or rational evidence. Therefore, this entire house of cards is predicated on mere opinion, and promulgated as fact.
Now, you posit your insinuations with out any foundational evidence. If you are going to continue to propagandize your model, thatâ€™s all well and good. But youâ€™ll have to cease pretending itâ€™s anything but that.
Going a step further and making predictions about evolutionary relationships would require empirical evidence, but Iâ€™m putting that aside for the moment.
You can predict all you wish, but you havenâ€™t posited a shred of evidence to support your case yet. You can do so (if you actually can) any time now, but that would be a change.
An ape is just a relatively large primate lacking a tail. We are primates, we are larger than monkeys, and we lack tails. That means according to the definition of what an ape is, humans are apes.
Where did the word â€œprimateâ€ come from (i.e. who coined it, and when was that accomplished)?
Also, if evolution were true, why then are humans the ONLY animals who have evolved to the superior status that we have achieved? After all of these supposed millions and billions of years, why are we the only species that:
Can design and manufacture and automobile/airplane/submarine?
Write a sonnet/book/music?
Have the capability to wipe out all other life forms on this planet?
Invent a language including all the laws and rules that govern that language?
(there are many other such examples, but I think you get the picture)
In other words, if evolution were true; why are humans the only superior race.
P.S. I will use the word "superior" because there is no other suitable word to use.