Why do we Evolutionists argue over these three things that essentially mean the same thing,
2006-09-25 09:20:43 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The term ape as it is used has no basis in biology anyway. chimps are much more related to humans than chimps are to gorillas. So any biological category which includes chimps and gorillas should also include humans as well. If you are going to use apes as including gorillas but not including humans, then chimps ( and bonobos) are not apes either.
Perhaps we need one term for humans, chimps and bonobos, and another for the rest of the primate family.
When our ancestors left the saftey of the trees and moved out on the savanna, there was great evolutionary pressure to evolve. The chimps ancestors stayed in the trees, and without a changing habitat were not under as much pressure to change. That is likely why humans look different than the other primates.
2006-09-25 09:25:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The only difference is accuracy. Fundamentalist opponents of scientific truth are fond of asking the question "if man evolved from apes, why are apes still here?", as if this were some kind of profound revelation that scientists simply haven't noticed. If you are going to criticize something, at least get the facts straight so you are criticizing what actually exists, not some figment of your imagination. And, if you are going to criticize a scientific theory, especially one backed up by volumes of reliable data, please be prepared to offer an alternative scientific theory that explains the observable facts as well as the theory you are criticizing.
2006-09-25 09:52:36 · answer #2 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is a difference and it explains why there are Apes and Monkey's co-evolving alongside us.
What creationist fail to understand is most basic mechanisms for evolution, and they always try and use the argument that if we evolved from Ape why are ape still here?
2006-09-25 09:24:27 · answer #3 · answered by trouthunter 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because there is a difference. We did not neccessarily evolve from a monkey or an ape... All three (monkey, ape, human) evolved from one common ancestor, but as such, have no DIRECT link to one another
2006-09-25 09:22:47 · answer #4 · answered by seanswimsnrt 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's odd to argue about it, since common ancester means that we all share the same ones. Why is it so scary to some people that humans could have been ape-like at one time? What difference does it make? We still got to be what we are.
2006-09-25 09:32:47 · answer #5 · answered by AuroraDawn 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is a difference, but the end result is the same:
We evolved from a primate species.
I don't usually get hung up on the terms, but if someone grossly mistates human evolution (we evolved from chimps), then I will correct them. Other then that I really don't care.
2006-09-25 09:24:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because saying we evolved from monkeys or apes give tiny-brained people the opportunity to say something like "BUTT DATS NT POSABLE CUZ DER R STIL MUNKYS N APES, LOLOLOLOPLOO". They can't fathom that there once existed a different species of primate unless you wave it right in front of their faces. Sometimes not even then.
2006-09-25 09:29:38 · answer #7 · answered by The Resurrectionist 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's very intriguing how evolutionist can embrace the idea of evolution & say that humans evolved from apes.
Wouldn't the apes have had to die out if their situation required them to evolve into a superior species?
2006-09-25 09:26:01 · answer #8 · answered by righton 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Why did you put this under religion? Most people argue over Adam and Eve and evolution.
2006-09-25 09:23:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No they do not mean the same thing.
There is a big difference and a lot of paperwork to try to explain the theory.
Not very learned on the subject?
2006-09-25 09:24:47 · answer #10 · answered by dyke_in_heat 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋