Does the evolution theory make sense?

Question

So if we are going to go off darwins theory..... with his natural selection find, obviously the moths changed colour because of a change in the environment. God, excersing his wisdom created things this way so that the animals could survive environmental changes and not die out.....
Why would we go from apes to humans? What kind of environmental change would cause this? Apes are not only stronger than humans, they are also more adapted to living outdoors... (humans have to wear clothes to keep warm)...
Why would we only get smarter, better looking and weaker?..... An environmental change could not have effected that? That goes against natural selection....
Please if anyone knows, or think that they can explain this please do..

I know we're not from apes..... I just used apes because of common belief....I would have said homos erectus..... but ..nm

Answer 1

Evolution is unproven voodoo science. It says life elovles, but when you ask where that very first life form evolvedfrom, it can't explain because life can't evolve from non-life. That very first life form had to be created, and it was created by God.

Answer 2

Man didn't evolve from apes, apes and man evolved from a common ancestor. Man adapted one way, the ape another. The environment and environmental change didn't "cause" the change, it simply selected a survivor. And, just guessing here but maybe the change was an ice age and maybe the surviving apes lived further south while the survivings homonids lived further north and survived because of better brain-powered adaptive ability (they could make tools, fires, whatnot). So that covers getting smarter. Better looking? that's purely an subjective statement (I have it on good authority that every female elephant seal ever made is postively HOT to every male elephant seal). Weaker...that IS a good question but do we know how strong the common ancestor was? Possibly that's the first evidence that a good brain can out wit pure muscle, eh? Any race car driver will tell you that the right engine depends on the track. Bigger is not always better.

That's just my take, I'm not a paleontologist.

Answer 3

Evolution doesn't push things because of "environmental changes" only. It favors any change that makes a species more likely to survive. Smarter is obviously in that category. Weaker and smaller on first examination seems to be a step backwards, but it gives you less to feed so it could make it easier to live. The simple proof of that is that big predators never last very long.

Wearing cloths was due to the drop in temperatures that were around and that was our intelligence allowing us to survive. Losing the natural fur became something that wasn't a hindrance and it allowed us to deal with hot and cold environments at the same time.

Evolution is the ONLY current theory that matches the fossil records. There is no doubt that the record is that things started simple and got more complex over time. Any valid theory HAS to match that FACT or has to otherwise explain the fossils. Creationism does not, so it is NOT A VALID THEORY. You can pick at details of evolutionary theory all day, but the basic concept HAPPENED SOMEHOW.

Answer 4

Environmental change isn't the only factor in evolution, there's also sexual selection and just plain survivability, not to mention good old random chance. Creatures evolve whether their environment changes or not, rapid change just speeds up the process by killing off those that aren't well adapted to the new environment. I think the fact that we've been so successful contradicts your statement. Obviously our intelligence *has* been a huge advantage. We have zero natural predators anymore, we can protect ourselves successfully from any other creature on this planet. We're plenty numerous, we live long lives, and most of us have a better quality of life than any other animal species. It doesn't contradict natural selection at all. Stronger doesn't mean better. "More attractive" is completely subjective, I'm sure a chimp finds another chimp more attractive than a human. High intelligence has turned out to be a huge advantage, so much so that there's no reason we need to be very strong, or fast, or tough, and with no need to keep those traits strong, they're slowly atrophying.

Answer 5

Yes humans have to wear clothes to keep warm. That's the environmental change that caused humans. The smart ones learned to manipulate tools, skin animals and use the hides to keep warm in unfriendly environments. Apes are only able to survive in certain climates. Humans learned to adapt themselves to nearly any climate. So while our ape friends froze in a certain areas, the humans put on skins and survived. But in other areas where the climate was more favourable, the apes continued on.

p.s. "Better looking"? what does that have to do with anything? Besides, I'm sure the apes would disagree.

Answer 6

Yes. You need an entire course in this AND an open mind! I don't really think you would like the (rather complicated) reasons WHY evolution makes sense. But if you REALLY want to know, start off by READING Darwin's "Origin of the Species", or do some research on line.

Here's a tidbit: since humans evolved in Africa, along with their ape cousins, from an original APE-LIKE ancestor, neither needed clothing (it was hot)! Most likely, humans and other hominids, like Homo erectus, only wore clothing for ceremony or protection while hunting. They didn't need it 'til they moved out of Africa and into colder climates, like Europe.

For some information on evolution itself, visit the first link below. For details on HUMAN evolution, try the second link.

You need to read this stuff for yourself and judge, not be told by people who have a bunch of differing opinions. KNOW the facts that are in evidence, then make up your own mind!

Happy hunting!

Answer 7

I'm no evolutionary biologist, but here's my guess: deforestation of the African savannah where proto-hominids lived resulted in an evolutionary advantage to those who could walk upright.

And apes are not "more adapted to living outdoors." We are far more successful at that than they are: we can live successfully in a much wider range of environmental situations. We didn't get weaker. We got stronger in a much different way. Note that humans are now the dominant species on the planet.

As for why apes still exist, the issue isn't that they were unfit within their limited range; simply that we were more fit. And we aren't really in competition with them. Where we are, we're wiping them out (unfortunately).

Answer 8

God in his wisdom made animals so they would not die out??? Then can you please explain EXTINCTION???

The moths didn't change color because of a change in the environment, the moths that were more suited for "camouflage" survived - this is NOT the same thing as what you said.

By the BIOLOGICAL classification: we ARE apes, we just happen to be the most advanced one. Our "big brains" allowed us to become the dominant life form on the planet, and in some climates clothes are unnecessary. This does NOT go against natural selection - doesn't it make sense that a more intelligent animal would be more likely to survive and produce offspring? You have a lot to learn about evolution - I suggest you study it a great deal more before posting any more comments on it that show that you do not understand what it is and how it works.

Answer 9

How does that go against natural selection? Are you thinking 'survival of the fittest' (i.e. strongest)? That's a very poor summation of Evolution. Man has spread across the globe; we dominate the environment everywhere we live; we've killed off countless of species. Losing a bit of fur, as well as some strength, while gaining better brains, was quite obviously worth it. In short, Evolutionary speaking, mankind is so far a clear winner.

Apes, I'm sorry to say, are in danger of being extinct.

Answer 10

It's really time you folks put down your fairy tales and catch up.

That man (as well as other species) has evolved through numerous incarnations is a proved fact. The skeletal evidence is absolute.

As for Darwin, 3 "tests" were required before it could be legitimately presented as fact, rather than "theory." The last remaining of those 3 "tests" was met about five years ago.

With regards to "better looking," from what perspective? Other animals probably find your looks, quite comical, if not disgusting.


.

Answer 11

Even if you ignore our increased intelligence, humans are much better adapted to life outside of the jungle, such as in the savannas and deserts of Africa.

But it's horribly wrong to dismiss our greater intelligence as not being an advantage that would be selected for via natural selection. Our intelligence made us able to compete against all other species, even stronger ones like apes, and better hunters like tigers & lions.

The other thing you should consider is that there is a lot of evidence that evolution of the human species actually did happen. It is not just speculation. Your argument is only speculation, there is no evidence to support your argument, and plenty of evidence against it.