Evolution question?

Question

If the evolution of ape to man is true why are there no fossils? I am not trying to say it is wrong, I am just curios. I mean there are millions of dinasour fossils and they are found in the same place, but the very few evolutionary fossils are found over a vast space and a couple of bones are then projected into a new piece of the evolutionary puzzle. Please someone clarify. It makes no sense to me that there are tons of dinasour fossils and almost no found cro magnon. Please don't point out to me that there are millions of questions about the Creation story. This questions isn't about creation, it is a valid question about evolution.

Well it doesn't look like I will get tons of answers to this one. I do appreciate you guys for answering though. It has given me more things to think about.

Wow, there were lots of answers and this is a tough one to choose the best answer from. Thanks for all the feedback and input. I am sorry everyone can't get points for this. Thanks to all.

Answer 1

Even though there are multiple ways fossils can form ( http://www.scsc.k12.ar.us/TuttS/fossil_formation.htm ), fossil formation is still rare ( http://www.fossils-facts-and-finds.com/fossil_formation.html ).

I think when it comes to "dinosaur" fossils, we are looking at a big phylogenetic group (see http://tolweb.org/Dinosauria/14883 ). Just think of the many different morphologies of creatures we call "dinosaur". On the other hand, "primates" are probably a smaller phylogenetic group (see http://tolweb.org/Primates/15963 )?? Do we have enough fossils to say what dino was T Rex's ancestor? I think not.

Also, primates are mainly tree-dwellers -- not very good conditions for fossilization. While there are some seaside dinos, so better conditions for fossilization (fossilization is good in water & sediment http://www.fossils-facts-and-finds.com/fossil_formation.html ).

Answer 2

Actually, there are quite a few fossils of prehumans, and I could list some of them for you: Australopthecus Africanus, A. Robustus, A. Afarensis, A. Rudolfensis, A. Boisii, Homo Habilis, Homo Ergaster, Homo Erectus, Homo Neanderthalis, Archaic Homo Sapiens, and Homo Sapiens (Cro-Magnon man) And I am sure I have not listed them all. Each one represents at least one fossil find, and many of these species have multiple fossil examples. But you are correct to say that hominid fossils are rare and few and far between. This is due to several factors: First of all, fossilization is a rare event in any species. We only have fossils of around 60,000 extinct species, and there had to be at least 1,000 fold more than this living on Earth in the past, that we will never know about. Secondly, our human ancestors were a very marginal species for most of our history, just barely clinging to survival. There were simply very few of us to even have the chance to make it into the fossil record, unlike the dinosaurs, which were VERY successful and left millions of their dead lying all over the place. And finally, we really are a very smart intelligent bunch, and we don't commonly let ourselves do stupid things like get stuck in tar pits or sucked into mud or quicksand or other similar fossilization havens. So there you have it. That doesn't mean that the whole theory of evolution should be thrown out. That would be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Answer 3

One sometimes reads that all hominid fossils could fit in a coffin, or on a table, or a billiard table. That is a misleading image, as there are now thousands of hominid fossils. They are however mostly fragmentary, often consisting of single bones or isolated teeth. Complete skulls and skeletons are rare. Of course, for those who require a literal interpertation of the Biblical Creation story to substantiate their faith in God, there will NEVER be enough evidence to the contrary.

I always find it sad some reduce God to gathering literal proof of a 6000 year old creation. I think these poor souls should get out into a dark country sky and look up at the Milky Way. WOW! Now that's God, a Creation that dwarfs the foolish arguments of humankind.

Any way, here's a good list of LOTS OF HUMAN FOSSILS with plenty of pictures and references too! Enjoy!

Answer 4

Some of the other responders noted that dinosaurs were more plentiful, and hence produced more fossils than hominids and their ancestors. There are a few additional reasons:

1. The dinosaurs were around for hundreds of millions of years, whereas Homids species have only been around for a few million. So it wasn't just that there were more dinosaurs around the entire planet at any one time - it's that there were many more of them for all time in all places.

2. Most dinosaur fossil finds are those of very large animals. larger fossils are easier to find.

3. Until relatively recently (a million years ago), all Hominid species were confined to Africa. There was only one set of conditions in which to preserve our fossils, and it wasn't a good one: rain forests, geological activity, etc. The wider spread of dinosaurs meant that their remains sometimes were deposited in ideal conditions for preservation - arid areas, low geological activity, etc. That's anothe reason why so many have survived.

Answer 5

There are some fossils from mankind's evolution.

The reason there are far more dinosaur fossils is simply that there were millions of dinosaurs, spread across every continent of the Earth.

Early in mankind's history, the entire population of our ancestors would have been a few hundred in some corner of Africa. Plus (if you look at other primates as examples) they probably hung around in small groups, not huge herds. It's not surprising they're difficult to track down.

Answer 6

I find your phrasing interesting. An open minded person might ask "what fossils exist?" You start with the knowledge that no fossils exist and ask why.

Where did this knowledge come frome? Do you have a doctorate in paleoanthropology? Have you done extensive research on the fossils attributed to be pre- and proto-humans? Or does your knowledge come from a religious tract?

If you want a real answer to the question you should have asked, check the link. It contains several descriptions of pre-H.sapiens fossils.

Answer 7

I find your question flawed. It is based on the premise that Apes came before humans. This is not what the theory of evolution indicates. It merely indicate that Apes (more accurately Chimps) and Humans share a common ancestor. There have been fossils found in Africa that seem to support this as well, but you are correct that the so called "missing link" has not been found. I find it interesting that few seem to consider the possibility that Chips are de-evolved humans. Although there is no evidence to support this, there is none to support that Homo Sapiens evolved from Chimp either, just that we share a common ancestor.

Answer 8

There is no evolution of ape to man. The theory is that apes and man have a common ancestor, which (I believe) lived about 6 million years ago. The problem with fossils is that it takes very special conditions to preserve them. Just think of sea shells, which are made of hard calcite, on the sea shore. The waves pound them into pieces. Now think of primates such as man with no hard outer shell. Even bones left on the surface will be destroyed before they can be fossilized.

Answer 9

Dinosaur encompasses many many many many species of them. The few that you are looking for are specifically ape to man. So I think the words you use are a bit not on the same level.

Also, possibly because Dinosaur eras were around much longer? Or maybe dinosaur bones are just bigger and easier to find.

Idk, there do seem to be a good numbe rof human-like fossils discovered but it takes time.

Answer 10

I think that's a bad comparison. A group as large as dinosaurs encompasses many more species than what are classified as hominids.
Dinosaurs also existed for 160 million years whereas hominids evolved relatively recently as a result there are more dino fossils.