Since I am a Christian, interested in scientific proof, this is one question that has stunned me. I do not agree with all aspects of evolution. There is only one right answer, but there are no wrong ones. I really want to see if anyone is thinking the same answer as me, which could also be wrong....
2006-11-15 19:33:36 · 18 answers · asked by liquidjesus23 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
I do not need to know if you think I'm ignorant. Insults are unwelcome. I did not say that I disagreed with the theory, but that I found some aspects that I didn't entirely agree with.
2006-11-15 22:46:03 · update #1
Ok, alot of people are misunderstanding my point. I am not asking where humans came from. I am not aking where apes came from. I am not asking people to tell me who evolved from what. All I was simply asking is why haven't apes evolved. I am not some Creationist trying to disprove evolution, I am simply trying to get a better grasp on why we have changed so much, and why they have changed so little.
2006-11-16 06:11:03 · update #2
Divergence leads to different developments in species, even those that share a common ancestor. We didn't come from apes as they are today. We came from an ape-like ancestor (primate) that we share with the apes of today, but there were divergent events at some points in history that lead to the developments of homosapiens and the other various primates of today.
2006-11-15 19:50:35 · answer #1 · answered by Todd D 3 · 6⤊ 1⤋
If you are honestly looking for "scientific proof", I'm afraid that you have stepped on a rhetorical landmine. You have had the misfortune of asking one of the many questions the Creationists ask several times a week, usually in with a bunch of other questions, for none of which they want answers. The answer is simple. Apes and humans descended from a proto-ape. Most of the branches that descended from this ancient creature have come to an end, and even now, several great ape species are endangered.
Your "only one right answer" statement set off a lot of alarm bells that suggested you were not interested in an answer, even if it was countered by your statement that your answer could be wrong. Presupposing the answer is not very scientific. Also, "scientific proof" triggers alarm bells. Science has evidence, demonstrated hypotheses, and disproof, but no absolute proofs of anything. The theory of gravity has less evidence, but then again, physics is simpler than biology. I hope you understand that your question sounded a lot like the Creationist "Evolution is stupid because if we evolved from apes..." questions that fly around here several times a week.
2006-11-16 01:27:37 · answer #2 · answered by novangelis 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because, like humans, the modern monkeys and apes also evolved from earlier monkeys and apes, but clearly not at different rates and in different directions. Why do different species of cat exist? Because they all evolved from earlier primitive cats. Lions did not evolve from tigers, did they?
We may yet agree- there is only one right answer.
I don't pretend to know how the universe or life originally began, although I have strong leanings toward certain theories.
But I know for certain, due to undeniable, hard reproducible evidence, that evolution - over millions of years - is a fact.
Anything else is not supported by evidence, just faith.
2006-11-15 20:30:38 · answer #3 · answered by Labsci 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'll quote you:
"There is only one right answer, but there are no wrong ones. I really want to see if anyone is thinking the same answer as me, which could also be wrong.... "
So, the only right answer (ASSUMING that's your answer) could also be wrong?
I agree with you - the answer you have in mind could be (is probably) wrong. As I don't know what it is, tho, I don't KNOW that it is.
My 1/2 arsed explanation; there's an environmental niche where remaining an ape remains an advantage. Ask Richard Dawkins for more details.
2006-11-15 23:02:53 · answer #4 · answered by Minmi 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We did not evolve from monkeys. People continually ask this question and I can't figure out why. One of the first things you should have learned in school when taught evolution was that we share common ancestors to monkeys. So they have evolved from that ancestor to what they are today, and so did humans.
2006-11-16 03:49:19 · answer #5 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Man did not evolve FROM any of the primates walking the earth currently.
Man SHARED a common ancestor with them.
It has been 2 days since I last posted this answer.
2006-11-16 00:48:30 · answer #6 · answered by John V 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
apes and humans are different branches of the evolutionary tree. their common ancester is australopithecus.
there is no only one right answer simply the best adjusted charachteristics in an individual survive through a million-year-old process ov evolution
2006-11-15 20:05:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
When you think of species being eliminated, there has to be something selecting against them (for example competition from a similar-more highly evolved form out surviving them because of an ADAPTATION). Lets make up an example to explain this to you.
The nature of sexual reproduction is to create variation, and variation will be in either "direction of a phenotype" (a person who is 6'0 will have children who are 5'10, 6'0, and 6'2 for example). This is the nature of inheritance.
Now, lets hypothetically say that we were all at one time "species X". The average member of species X can run 6mph. Well, some members can run 9mph, and some can only run 3mph, again by nature of inheritance. Well, if food were running short lets say, or any situation that "selected" for faster species members, everyone who ran LESS THAN 7mph would die, and those who ran GREATER than 7 MPH would survive.
So now when this population of faster runners reproduces (7mph,8 mph, 9 mph), their offspring will run, again by nature of inheritance, maybe between 6mph - 12mph (as opposed to 3mph - 7mph). Lets call this group now SPECIES Y.
Suddenly, perhaps more food is available, and speed is no longer a selective advantage. Well, variation will continue to occur, but this time, slower members will not be selected against. So, some will continue to be slower, and some will get faster. The ones who get faster, are Species Z. The ones who didnt get faster, remain Species Y. But both have survived because nothing has selected against them!!!
So looking at humans and their "evolutionary predecessors", remember that humans have slowly been removing themselves from any competition with apes. Only this time don't look at speed, look at many many traits (intellience, walking on 2 legs, opposable thumbs, etc.) We have been able to find our own food, and are involved in littlle competition with them for quite some time now.
When thinking about evolution, you must think BIG PICTURE. That's how I always saw it. You must think who is gaining SELECTIVE ADVANTAGES because of ADAPTATIONS FOR SURVIVAL, and who is going to be at SELECTIVE DISADVANTAGE based on COMPETITION AND LACK OF SURVIVAL.
2006-11-15 20:00:13 · answer #8 · answered by Brian B 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
people have different opinions but base on archaeologist people came from apes.... there are still apes because of the environment that changes.. so that apes dont evolve no more
2006-11-15 19:41:36 · answer #9 · answered by camsimyu 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because creatures evolve to fit into ecological niches. If another animal evolves and fits into the nich better then he can force out the previous animal.
But since we don't eat jungles grasses like many of the greater apes and depend more on meat in our deits we don't push out many of our ape cousins.
We may have pushed out a close ancestor, the Neanderthal man, but there is no evidence.
2006-11-15 19:39:38 · answer #10 · answered by adphllps 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋