If it takes millions of years for monkeys to evovle?

Question

Then how come we dont have any real evidence of a missing link?

All the "possible links" have been proven hoaxes.

And further more, why do you always dodge a legitimate question?

Why arent there monkeys that are still evolving?

If we evovled from monkeys the change should be eventual and there should be sometype of missing ling alive, not just upright walking hairless people and hairy hunched over apes.

But our foot, we have a big toe on the top of our foot. Where ever youre at just take a look at your foot. The big toe on us is FAT!

The big toe on a monkey is like a thumb, so right now do a comparison with your hand and your foot.

There is no ape that shows a gradual change where the bottom thumb gradually becomes a big toe, henceforth a human.

Please explain this along with why this question is always dodged?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_piltdown.html

No the sources are actually independent.
If youll take the time to read them youll find that they criticize creationism too.

Answer 1

Perfectionists,
you all know that this guy is referring whatever common ancestor you beleive in. Ape or not, monkey or not, there must only have been one, and that is what the question is about. Speaking of this common ansestor, since humans are surperior to all other primates that have evolved along the same lines as us, dosent natral selection determine that the inferior speceis would die out, and that today there wouldn't be any apes because millions of years ago, one of the two very simaler emerging species would have been surperior, and would have been better equipped to survive?
Consider the human baby. Defenseless. Some apes or monkeys' babies cling to their mother so that when danger comes, the mother can escape and eaisily carry the baby with her. Human babies are incapable of holding on to their mother by their own strength. So therefore millions of years ago, our ansestors would have encountered a predator at the same time, and the human would have been eaiser prey because the ape mother could run faster because she didnt have to carry her baby, it simply held on.

Answer 2

"all the possible links have been proven hoaxes"

You have been getting your information from the wrong sources my friend.

Check the link below to see examples of the thousands of transitional fossils we have found thus far. It appears as if you would like to see a complete skeleton of a human with thumbs on his feet? This may never have occurred. Big toes could have been a malformation caused by genes that caused one group of humans to thrive over another.

Check the link below, look at the evidence, read a little more about the study of evolution, what has been proven, and what has been disproven, and you will be in a better position to question it.

Unfortunately at this time, it appears as if you are getting all your information from Christian websites. You can continue to think you have the right information by taking only one side, but have you ever tried learning about Jesus from a Hindu website? You will find that the information provided will tend to be one sided and not contain everything you know and love about Him.

Answer 3

Because for all the talk about evolution and the proof thereof. There isn't any. Only conclusions and suggestions. There is not even one fossil or combination of fossils that prove evolution. We, believers, believe in a invisible God. Evolutionists believe in a theory. I don't really think there is much difference there. But they continually claim proof.

And your question brings up the real "smoking gun" question.
Evolution is based on a system called "natural selection" which claims the survival of the fittest. So, if natural selection took place then why are we, humans, the least of the primates, physically? That part does not make sense.

Personally, I think if we evolved, we reached the peak and are now devolving. Because for all that is said about the who, what, and where of mankind, none of it makes any difference.
If the theory of evolution was proven today, just how would our lives be better tomorrow?

Answer 4

If you knew anything about evolution, then you wouldn't be asking this question at all, you would see how silly it is.

There have been all sorts of transitional forms found over the years, I read about on they found last year.

There ARE monkeys that are still evolving, in fact ALL living things are constantly evolving, including humans. We will not look the same in 50,000 years. If you could see a human from 50,000 years in the future, you wouldn't recognize what you see.

You are wrong about us evolving from monkeys. Humans and monkeys both evolved from a common ancestor. The less advanced humans that came before us died out because they couldn't compete with us, that's what natural selection is.

People who know what they're talking about don't dodge the question, it's just that people like you who know nothing about evolution don't understand the answers that you are given, and you have a religious belief that encourages you to stay ignorant. Can you blame us for getting exasperated when trying to explain stuff to you that is way over your head.

Answer 5

The theory of evolution is not perfect yet. It is a working scientific theory. We don't HAVE all the answers, but we are getting more and more each day. Just because we don't have all the answers yet doesn't mean we won't have answers in the near future. Don't assume that just because someone isn't able to give you a rock-solid answer, it automatically means they're incorrect. And even if they are incorrect, it doesn't automatically mean that your theory IS correct. There's probably not anyone here who can tell you anything you can't look up for yourself. Go to some non-Christian web sites about evolution. They will tell you the information that has been found, what has been proven correct, what has been found to be incorrect. Unlike what the majority of Creationists think, scientists who study the theory of evolution are not biased, and have no reason to lie to you. Evolution is not a religion. It's not a "belief" that scientists have some ulterior motive about making you believe, and therefore need to "prove" to you. It is working scientific study. Please stop coming here and demanding that we prove or explain every single little thing to you. We don't KNOW all of the answers. We'd have to go look it up to answer you, and you're perfectly capable of doing that yourself.

Answer 6

Chimps share 95% of our DNA. You could call them missing links if you were inclined to.

Here is my standard answer.

This question gets asked so often that some answerers in Religion & Science have made a drinking game of it - much like the TV show "Frasier", when Frasier, Niles and Martin all watched "Antiques Road Show" together. In the episode, every time someone said "veneer" they would all take a drink; Niles and Frasier of a fine wine, Martin of Raineer Ale. You may get some answers that say "Swig" or "Gulp" or "Thanks for the excuse to drink". That's what they mean. If you do a search on "still monkies", "still monkeys" and "still apes" you'll get roughly 2 - 3 per day since YA started.

Here is a short answer:

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.

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 7

at first, monkeys did no longer evolve into guy. we had an basic ancestor. get your info immediately till now you mean we'r all idiots. 2nd of all, we never suggested one specific animal developed in the time of its life. we suggested a species did. this is observed as adapting on your atmosphere. merely like once you reside 10 years close to the equator, you get used to warmth and it would not computer virus you. then you certainly progression to someplace chillier because of the fact of a activity flow or something and you're no longer used to the chilly, yet after a while you adapt and the chilly would not worry you anymore.

Answer 8

On that note why are there not human remains when we look far enough back in time? What happens in evolution is a minor change in the species lets say some offspring got thumbs. Due to this minor change that offspring was more successful than its predecessors. Since it was more successful it was considered the Alpha male. It was the new breeder, and therefor it would make the new offspring. Thus the old ones lack of trait disappeared.

Answer 9

Monkeys are still evolving. So is everything else. Humans became humans by chance. An opposable thumb is pure chance. It may never happen again. What's the problem? You won't live long enough to see a new species of monkey most likely. Maybe you'll get to see a new species of something else, but there's no guarantee of that.

Answer 10

Keep up the observations and the questions. You might want to ask them what is the common ancestor for the ape and man? They will say a lemur. They can't answer which came first the ape or man of course. Perhaps they will say both, who knows?

But get them to find the missing links between that creature, the lemur and ape and man.