from monkeys to human - what fallacy does this argument fall under?

Question

"consider this, we have similar or even some same dna genes as the monkey class, and we even have similar build, and move around similarly! such similarities, such possibilities, we must have descended from the same ancestor!"

i think it falls under a variation of "undistributed middle"(monkeys have this gene, we have this gene, therefore we have a same ancestor), and "shifting the grounds" (from similarities to ancestor).

what other fallacies can you see in this argument?

for those that are so narrow-minded you cannot even see any fault in this hasty conclusion, dont bother to answer this question then, since you think there's nothing wrong with jumping to conclusions. thanks.

by the answers from the evolutionists here, seems like they dont like logic to be applied to this question, or they just don't believe that logic exists. too bad they're so narrow minded.

Answer 1

Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent

Answer 2

When 95% of our genome is the same as that of a chimpanzee, I'd hardly say that it constitutes "jumping to a conclusion."
This a logical deductive process. It merely indicates that at some point in the far distant past we had a common ancestor, thats all. What form that ancestor took is not really known.

Answer 3

seems logical to me that a common ancestor would exist and the forebears would mutate into different species with slightly different DNA. We're talking eons, not thousands of years...

Answer 4

Obviously you're a biologist, geneticist, physicist, psychologist, theologian or whatever, with a theory more in line with reality, AND that your insight is not a "daddy in the sky did it" argument. The world is all ears. I very much want to hear about your breakthrough. Speak up and please make sure I get a email about it.

Answer 5

I see they fallacy of asking a rhetorical question, without the slightest knowledge of the workings of biology and evolution.
This questions displays complete and utter ignorance of evolution. Please read 'Origin of Species' by Darwin, then repost an intelligent question.
Or, better yet, just quote some bible verses, that'll show us.

Answer 6

It falls under the ol' fallacies that really are true category.

Answer 7

I think it falls under the " Who gives a sh*t " category. Monkey or no monkey, I came from God. End of story.

Answer 8

fisrt we humans are not monkeys those stupid scientists said that just so we can make idiots out of ourselves in saying that and second if humans were from monkeys then why do we see alot of monkeys everywhere by now there shouldn't be any monkeys. so there it is we are not monkeys!!!!!!!!!

Answer 9

Well, it's not just one gene that's the same. It's something like 90%/

Answer 10

How about "straw man" fallacy?

And the genetic match is ~99% (see article)