But then we’re “less evolved” in terms of grip strength, force generation and any number of areas where other apes beat us.
There’s no such thing as “more evolved” or “less evolved,” which is the parent’s point.
There’s no such thing as “more evolved” or “less evolved,” which is the parent’s point.
There is, in no sense, any way to talk about less/more evolved. Except for age of lineage, which is the same for all life on earth.
I'm not sure but I think the above poster was making the point that saying 'more' or 'less' evolved implies the possibility of a generalised qualitative measuring of mutations.
The onus is in you to prove one path is objectively “more evolved” than another. All other animals have undergone the same amount of time evolving as humans.
What evidence do you present that we accumulated more genetic changes than any other organisms? Did you catalogue and count the changes?
All you have is a completely unrelated analogy that misrepresents what I said. What does maturity and age have to do with this discussion?