if evolution is true why aren't monkeys still turning into people today?

Answer 1

They do, but as soon as the metamorphosis is done, they are gang-stabbed by crowds of creationists who are afraid of being proven wrong.

Keep your eyes on them monkeys, lass.

Answer 2

First of all, evolution doesn't say that monkeys turned into humans. It works like this:

Somewhere, a long time ago, monkeys and humans had a common ancestor. To survive in a certain biological niche, the species split into humans and monkeys.

Now, to your question: Why don't we see things evolving today?

The answer: We do. It's just happening so very slowly that we don't realize that we're seeing "in between" states.

Think of it this way: You're wandering around about 50 million years or so ago and you can see lots and lots of these little dog sized creatures (eohippus). You hang out there for 15 years or so. There are still a lot of these little dog-sized creatures hanging around. Would you think that they would eventually evolve into horses and have a hoof rather than toes? Probably not.

We can't tell what the "final" (and I'm putting that into quotes because for the most part, unless the species/lineage goes extinct, evolution will be ongoing) thing is just by looking at what's alive now.

If you want to see evolution happening, you'd have to have something that reproduces very quickly so that you're around long enough to see it. A great example of this is bacteria, which double in number about every 20 minutes. Bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics is sort of a "quick and dirty" example of evolution.

Answer 3

The reason that monkeys are not turning into people today is because evolution is a very long process small changes must take place before a whole will change. In the paper there was an article regarding Chimpanzes and the use of weapons. There is documented evidence of them sharpening sticks and killing bush babies with them. There is always the possiblity that given the correct amount of time and the correct combination of genes there is the possiblity that one day there could be a new species of human, but no one knows where it will come from.

Answer 4

This question gets asked so often that some people in Religion & Science have made a drinking game of it; every time someone ***, they take a drink. 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 5

Proving evolution can be problematical, but devolution is readily apparent. Simply look at all the people turning into monkeys, in the Bush administration.

Answer 6

this is a question based off a limited knowledge of evolution. even if you read a little bit about evolution you would know that macro evolution takes millions of years and that monkeys didn't just poof turn into humans.

Answer 7

A better question:

Why do creationists refuse to actually learn about what Darwinian evolution is (and is not!) before asking questions that show off their own ignorance?

Answer 8

I wish I could think you are truely interested in trying to understand evolution.

Just in case you are, I recommend you read "Climbing Mount Improbable" by Richard Dawkins. It will help clear up a lot of misconceptions about evolution.

Answer 9

Because it would take millions of years. And you are not able to notice the changes taking places in a couple thousands of years.
Second, humans and other three species of anthropoids come from a non further existing species of APES, not monkeys.
Eventually only one species of anthropoids survived, and this gave origin to the modern man.

Answer 10

Because they don't need to. There is no point.
Evolution doesn't mean that all animals would become humans. Human is not a goal, nor the perfect creature. Just one of the animals that evolved due to the environmental circumstances.
Evolution is totally random and doesn't have a final destination.