are today? I see apes, I see us, but nothing in between.
2006-11-11
15:31:27
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Social Science
➔ Anthropology
Your answers are fascinating and intriguing, I think I will take a course in Anthropology. I do have a Prof who resembles the Neanderthal man, maybe they aren't extinct after all.
2006-11-12
15:23:50 ·
update #1
far middle- maybe not every body has as great an access to education as you, maybe that's why Qs are being asked here. Not everybody is on here just to insult. Yes, I am young and my education is not through. So why the insult?
2006-11-13
15:45:30 ·
update #2
One of the cruelest facts of the evolutionary tree is that most branches die out. You missed Neanderthals by only 24,000 years. In the wild, many of the species of great ape are threatened or endangered.
Also, you can't look at modern apes and call them our ancestors. They are our cousins. We split from the lesser apes about 18 million years ago, orangutans 14 million years ago, gorillas 7 millions years ago and chimpanzees about 4 million years ago. Our common ancestors did not resemble modern apes any more than modern man.
Evolution is absolutely ongoing. Unfotunately, in the wild, orangutans and gorillas are facing the end.
2006-11-11 16:51:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by novangelis 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
If you look at the genetic code, you will find that there is really little difference between species. Within our genetic code are traits which no longer express themselves, yet are critical to the survival of our cousins. Some species are categorized broadly with sub species definitions, while others get their own classification because of a single trait. It seems to be rare that any species so closely related as to allow interbreeding, could not maintaining their unique lines living in close proximity, as the populations would merge. This would be a reasonable theory to explain why subspecies have unique habitats, and why there is less diversity in populations with vast ranges, or populations which spread quickly. The true fate of Neanderthals is uncertain. Mitochondrial studies don't support a merger, but m-DNA sources from the female line, and I would question if a smaller Afarensis male could just never have overcome the size barrier of the Neanderthal female, thus no m-DNA to trace. I firmly believe that the Bonobo Chimpanzee is so close as to qualify as an intermediary to other Great Apes. Intermediaries are relatively easy to find in nature where populations are small, i.e. goldfish, bettas & archerfish, mudskippers, waterdogs, salamanders, and frogs. Each transition is small, yet the range is wide. If anyone is attempting to use the lack of intermediaries in their anti-evolution argument they are not only mistaken, but also missing on the most important part of faith and how it applies to living today. Many scholars, and recently the Catholic church, have acknowledged the role evolutionalry science has played in increasing our understanding of the world in which we live. Albert Einstein wrote on the issue many times and provides great perspective to the roles of Faith & Science. I hope this helps. Good Luck!
2006-11-12 12:20:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Brian L 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Based on previous questions/answers your not very bright, so I will explain it as short and simple as I can.
Evolution is still occurring. But, it occurs very, very slowly. It takes thousands of years to make a small change and the theory of evolution is relatively new. If you want proof you can read some of the many studies that have been done. Just the other day they found a dolphin near japan that had back flippers that resemble legs. If you have trouble understanding any of the words I used get a dictionary or ask your mommy for help.
2006-11-13 03:23:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Return Of Buckwheat 1
·
2⤊
3⤋
Because 1) the history of life on earth is a branching bush, and 2) over 99% of species that have ever lived have since gone extinct. So what you see living today is just the tips of the branches. If you want to see intermediaries, you have to go to the fossil record. There are a lot of intermediary fossils between us and our ape-like ancestors.
2006-11-12 06:32:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
Yes, it always goes on. But we did not evolve from apes, we just share a common ancestor. Scientists have been searching for the "missing link" between these ancestors and humans for a long time, and have yet to find it. However, if you need proof that humans are evolving, look at it this way : in the past few decades, the average height of city dwellers in China has increased by about 20cm (9")
2006-11-12 01:04:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Purplepossum 2
·
3⤊
3⤋
All genetic frequencies are their own frequencies.
The energy bits called quarks that surround these
frequencies can undergo a change that gives the
appearance of evolution.
However, this change can only occur while the
energy form is dimensional.
Change cannot occur when energy is in it's
Quantum mode.
Since energy forms can jump trillions of years
from birth to birth, it's almost impossible to
track the gradual change that takes place.
2006-11-11 15:58:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by kyle.keyes 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
Yes it is ongoing. For instance I have webbed feet between the 2nd and third toes. This is a common birth 'defect' which does not impede function of anything but is natures way of getting rid of toes which aren't used for anything by humans anymore.
2006-11-12 10:20:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by betterthanblacks 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
Thank you for using your intelligence. Darwin's theory has already been proved wrong by the scientists and archaeologists. There is a book called Forbidden Archeology and The Hidden History of the Human Race. Both these books have heaps of archaeological findings that man was way more advanced even millions of years ago. go to http://www.stephen-knapp.com for some info there
2006-11-11 16:05:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
5⤋
Evolution is occurring as we speak. Left-handedness is the next step.
2006-11-11 15:44:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Timeponderer and novangelis have the best answers so far.
2006-11-13 07:20:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋