English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

if man comes from monkeys why are there still monkeys around because it is based on advancement of a given species.Surely we should see evidence of some kind of transition

2006-11-03 11:07:49 · 36 answers · asked by bells 1 in Science & Mathematics Biology

36 answers

You've got a few misconceptions there. I'm going to assume you are really asking a question and not just fishing for agreement, so I'll try and straighten them out.

First of all, IF man evolved from other primates, it would be more proper to say that mankind arose from -A- primate. To draw an analogy, if you build a house out of lumber from trees, it doesn't mean there are no trees left in the world... only the trees you used to make your house are gone. So it is perfectly plausible for monkeys to still be around even though something else might have evolved from them. Populations become isolated and develop different traits all the time - try comparing someone from China, Iceland, and Africa some time.

Secondly, I don't suspect any evolutionist would say that man evolved from monkeys. Instead they would suggest that they had a common ancestor, and both man AND monkeys are different from that ancestor, just in different ways.

And last is the question of transition. And transition implies you're going somewhere. Since none of us know what life will be like a hundred million years from now, it may very well be appropriate to say that EVERYTHING now is in a state of transition from what it used to be from what it will be. Looking for 'half-fins' and the like is a straw-man argument, though there is certainly no dearth of vestigal organs and DNA around in most species, if you only look for it.

I respect your desire to dispute the validity of evolution. Most true scientists WELCOME having their theories challenged - it can only make them stronger and get rid of bad ones. But if you're going to tilt at a windmill, make sure your lance is pointed in the right direction!

2006-11-03 11:24:14 · answer #1 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 7 1

Try standing next to your parents, or grandparents. Do you notice you're taller than them? Then, go to Mt. Vernon and walk through the doorway. It's very short. The average human height has increased dramatically since then. That is evolution. Evolution is not based on advancing the species. It is based on being able to pass along your DNA- and only the strongest can survive to do that. Haven't you ever heard of the pepper moths? Before the industrial revolution, they were found mostly to be very light in color. However, after the industrial revolution got really big, mostly dark moths were found. Do you know why? The trees changed color. The pollution from the factories darkened the trees. Only the dark moths could survive to pass on their genes, because they coucld camoflauge better. That was only a 75 year span. Are the 1700's not recent enough for you? 300 years compared to the age of the earth (4.5 billion years, in real life, not going by the Genesis myth) is so indescribably short. And what about Darwin's observations? The finches of the Galapagos Islands are different species. They differentiated and changed because of their different environments. I don't quite understand how you can so blatantly ignore the world around you. It's probably pointless to even give you any evidence, since you won't read it or believe it anyway. Well, I personally believe what has been proven rigorously and scientifically, not a story that was made up a few thousand years ago. Seriously though, I would greatly appreciate if someone could explain to me why they ask this type of question on the scientific page, when they really don't want a scientific answer? If you can answer that for me, I'd appreciate it.

2006-11-03 13:03:06 · answer #2 · answered by bflute13 4 · 2 0

I am properly sick of these questions about once a month someone who believes in creationism posts a "question" in the science area trying to strike a blow against evolution by saying something they clearly think is deeply insightful. You clearly have no understanding about the theory of evolution so please if you want to argue on a scientific level about a scientific theory pleeeease learn some science. Otherwise discuss religion in the religion section.
SHORT ANSWER.... WE DID NOT EVOLVE FROM MONKEYS.. monkeys and humans share a comman ancestor which is no longer around. There IS plenty of "recent" evidence of evolution since humans haven't been around on the planet from very long all of human evolution is recent. If you want more recent then you have to look at species that have a much shorter life span and gestation period and once again there IS plenty of evidence in those cases. Evolution is a theory, a very good theory but still a theory and containing some holes, that does not mean that the only other explanation is magic!

2006-11-06 01:42:39 · answer #3 · answered by blue_cabbage 2 · 0 0

In evolutionary terms there is 'recent' evidence - evolution takes millions of years, so evidence of pre-human species from thousands of years ago is recent!

As to why there are still monkeys: The idea is that mankind evolved from apes - not that apes turned into Man. I suppose the easiest way to think of it is that we are a different 'species' of ape, and that particular species has done rather well for itself :)

For example, we all agree that dogs are dogs. However, there are many different types, with varying abilities. Dalmations for example, are really stupid, which Jack Russels are really smart. But they're both still dogs.

Some of the great apes, like Chimps and Orangatans can use tools - they uses things lying around to help them forage for food etc. However, lesser primates have not figured out how to do this. It's reasonable to suppose that, a long time ago, a particular species of ape figured out how to make better tools, etc etc, and devloped into the very clever ape known as Man.

The theory of evolution is by no means complete - there are still unanswered questions. However, the evidence thus far supports it. A few hundred years ago, we didn't know what gravity was, or how to explain it, but we figured it out eventually!! I'm sure the same will be true of evolution in the end. What you have to remember is: Knowledge takes time. Just because we don't know the answer now, doesn't mean we won't in the future.

2006-11-03 23:01:34 · answer #4 · answered by Laurelin 2 · 2 0

Have you not heard of super bugs MRSA. They have evolved from another form of bacteria, and evolved to resist antibiotic use and will evolve again in our life time to resist further. Both forms of the bug are out there and many more, but many weaker transitions will not have survived.
This is simple example I know but more complex organism such as humans take many generations to evolve therefore it is much more difficult to see close up. Evolution can only be examined retrospectively, IE it has to have happened before you know it has occurred after all it is caused by alterations which have a positive effect for survival and not by design.
If you are really interested look at Australia which has a very different species base than most of the world, with it's pouched animals, why only there! Because it was isolated in a evolutionary sense, and guess what humans moved there! They look different to native species. You get the picture I'm sure.

2006-11-03 11:28:38 · answer #5 · answered by rachel.cox4@btopenworld.com 2 · 5 0

"If man comes from monkeys why are there still monkeys around?" WOW! GOSH! Why didn't scientists think of that?! This changes everything!!

Actually, the ONLY persons who EVER mention such a silly idea as humans evolving from monkeys are religious fundamentalists who don't have a grade school level of understanding of biological science. No scientist would ever suggest such an absurd idea.

As for recent evidence of evolution, just pick a species! Then compare it to the fossil evidence of similar species from as recently as 100,000 years ago. You will find similar species but not the same species. There's your evidence! You are surrounded by it!

2006-11-03 14:54:20 · answer #6 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 5 0

Evolution is not based on advancement of a given species. Evolution is a random and directionless process with no end point, it is a response to changes in the environment.
Evolution is a process that is nigh-on impossible to observe in the short term, all life on earth is in a permanent state of slow transition.
Man does not come from monkeys - humans and monkeys shared a common ancestor several million years ago.

If you want some recent examples of adaptation and evolution in action, just look at the flu virus - it is constantly mutating and adapting in response to the action of the immune systems of its hosts.

2006-11-03 13:45:21 · answer #7 · answered by lauriekins 5 · 2 0

Sigh, another variation on the stupid "if people evolved from monkeys" question.

NO, evolution does not necessarily involve what to the human mind looks like advancement. If an organism is simplified by a mutation and the simplified organism is more successful at surviving and reproducing then the mutation will be disproportionately represented in the proceeding generations.

Evolution is about change, NOT ADVANCEMENT.

2006-11-05 02:49:13 · answer #8 · answered by corvis_9 5 · 1 0

Electra - your reasoning is, er, extraordinary:

1 There was no Noah's Ark and even if there were it must have happened after a lot of evolution had already happened, or there would have been no Noah
2 If SOME organs are vestigial and have no function, it doesn't follow that ALL organs are vestigial - after all I get along quite happily with an appendix
3 There are also fossils of species that no longer exist - simply because a creature existed long ago doesn't disprove evolution - sharks haven't evolved for millions of years (no need to), but we have
4 Of course it is a different species of finch - it got that way by evolving to adapt to its new environment - that's the point

2006-11-04 02:04:10 · answer #9 · answered by Martin 5 · 1 0

You're only showing your own ignorance here. But I'll waste my time putting you right, though you won't take it in.

We are not descended from monkeys. Monkeys and ourselves have common ancestry; go back far enogh so do all mammals. Evidence, how about the almost identical internal structure of mammals - same circulatory system, muscular systems, reproductive systems etc etc. The similarities are more striking than the differences. Especially between man and the other apes.

The process takes place over MILLIONS of years - I'm not sure you understand how long that is. How recent are you looking for. Last Wednesday? Look up 'peppered moth' on Google if you want recent evidence of evolution.

2006-11-03 11:22:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6 2

fedest.com, questions and answers