If some people say that humans evolved from monkeys and apes , then why are there still apes and monkeys?

Question

I do not belive that humans evolved from monkey and apes. I am asking this question to see what all believers would say.
- Jazmine ♥

Answer 1

B/c God created men and woman, go read the bible

Answer 2

Humans did not evolve from modern day monkeys and apes. Rather, monkeys, apes and humans all share relatively recent (in geologic time) common ancestry with ancestral primates.

People who misundertand evolution often pose the question of why monkeys are no longer evolving to be humans. They fail to grasp that 1. evolution is not teleological; that humans do not sit on top of some evolutionary "ladder" to which lower life forms are climbing; and 2. that while monkeys, apes and humans share relatively recent ancestry, each species is evolving in an independent direction (like branches on a tree).

Having said that, it appears as though many apes and monkeys are undergoing rapid selection for increased intelligence. This may be a result of having to adapt to their ecosystems undergoing rapid change from human impact. University of Chicago geneticist Chung I-Wu compared the DNA sequences of genes expressed in brain function among chimps, humans and several species of Old World monkeys. Wu found that the brains of chimps and the monkeys are rapidly evolving for increased intelligence, while those of humans have been static for the last few thousand years.

Answer 3

Because they evolved from our common ancestor too. We humans got smarter. The great apes, including chimpanzees, got stronger. They are stronger than us humans. (A 180-pound chimp would wipe the floor with a 180-pound human, even a college wrestler.) I don't expect you to believe that, but if you try hard enough you can understand it.

Here is a little something extra for you, what the Cajuns call "lagniappe", like the free cookie the baker gives the kids when Mom buys a big birthday cake:

Back in 1776, monarchists (Monarchists are people who want to be ruled by a king or queen, not butterfly fanciers.) argued against democracy as a form of government. They said it was absurd to believe that "All men are created equal" because anyone could see men came in different heights, weights and colors. Case closed.

My point is not about democracy. It is about debate. Before you argue about something, you should understand it. If you don't understand it, you'll look foolish. One night on the "Saturday Night Live" TV show, Gilda Radner argued vehemently against the "Deaf Penalty", instead of the "Death Penalty". She looked absurd and we all laughed until the beer came out our noses, which was what she wanted. You don't want people to laugh at you.

In a serious debate, you should understand the other side. Note that I didn't say "Believe". Understanding is not the same as believing. If you were to study 20th century European Political history, you would have to understand several forms of government: communism (the USSR), fascism (Germany, Italy), socialism (Lots of countries), socialist democracy, capitalistic democracy and constitutional monarchy. You would not believe in all of them; you COULD not believe in all of them at once. If you tried, your head would explode. You would, however, have to understand their basic concepts.

If you were to study comparative religion, you would have to understand what Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Taoists and Confucians believe. You would not have to convert to a new religion every week, but you would have to understand the other ones. You would not get very far in your studies if you dismissed all the other ones as "wrong". They believe their path is the right one just as strongly as you believe your path is the right one.

99% of the biologists alive today believe that species evolve, and that the theory of evolution is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life. Christian biologists, Jewish biologists, Muslim biologists, Hindu biologists, Buddhist biologists; Australian, Bolivian and Chinese biologists; 99% of them believe it is the best explanation. Yes, it is only a theory. Planetary motion - the theory that the earth went around the sun, not vice versa - was only a theory for a long time. Some people still don't believe it.

Your question has been answered, hundreds of times, by people more versed in biology than I. It gets answered ever week here at YA.

If you are truly curious, ask your minister to give you a short, reasoned explanation of evolution. Tell him you don't want to believe it, of course; you just want to understand it. If he says he can't because it is wrong, he is as ignorant as those monarchists I mentioned above.

Answer 4

Good question! As you point out, it is unlikely that they evolved from a species that is still with us today. The general consensus is that humans evolved from an earlier simian form that likely also gave rise to some of our other primates. So we are not the great grandchildren of monkeys, but rather their cousins. BTW, this isn't theory, it is fact supported by the DNA.

Answer 5

This is a serious misconception about evolution. Humans did not evolve from monkeys and apes, humans shared a common ancester with monkeys and apes many thousands of years ago. Since we split from this common ancester humans evolved along one evolutionary path, and monkeys along a different evolutionary path etc... This same concept holds for all species, e.g. whales and hippos once shared a common ancester, this does not necessarily mean that whales evolved from hippos.

Answer 6

Humans didn't evolve from monkeys and apes. Humans (who are a type of ape), all the other apes, and monkeys all evolved from a creature which isn't around anymore. A sort of proto-primate.

Answer 7

common misconception.

Humans evolved from a bacteria too yet bacteria are the dominant form of life on the planet today (in terms of biomass).

A divergense of a species does not mean that the original creature goes away. Often divergence is the result of the conditions of one specific geographic region so that creature in every other place remains the same while only that regions creature changes to better survive. So you see how you can end up with two relate creatures?

Incidentally, we are now able to SEE the relationships between creatures and we've had to rework a whole lot of taxonomy because of the things we can now see in molecular biology.

Answer 8

I believe we share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. We did not directly evolve from them.
"Experts agree that humans split off from a common ancestor with chimpanzees several million years ago and that gorillas and orangutans split off much earlier. But it is difficult to date precisely when, although most recent studies have put the date at about 5 million to 7 million years ago."

Answer 9

Because the mutations that created humans didn't happen to all monkeys and apes, (actually, we're a parallel branch only distantly related to them) only to a very few. The rest have continued unmodified to this day.

Answer 10

Not all apes evolved into men.

Answer 11

If some people say that Christians came from Jews, then why are there still Jews?