I suppose it boils down to what is implied by your meaningfully. Will guess gross morphology and adaptation to ecological niche. In a sense one could argue sh

I suppose it boils down to what is implied by your meaningfully. Will guess gross morphology and adaptation to ecological niche. In a sense one could argue sharks are more highly evolved because they out competed (or were luckier than) our ancestors and were not forced to change. Humans gross physical differences from the common ancestor are clearly more recent and therefore less refined. What cannot be said is: that in the interim we (sharks/humans) have not evolved every bit as much as one another. Evolution is not anthrocentric.