A question about evolution to all evolutionists??

Question

I just want to start off saying that i am pro creation. Well, seeing that natural selection involves survival of the fittest and the whole concept of evolving to suit the environment and such, why are apes still around? If the apes evolved into man due to survival of the fittest and adapted to become bigger and better, why are there still apes that are supposed to have "died off" in terms of them being the weaker link in survival of the fittest. Also, why is there only one species (human) advanced as us? Why haven't dogs of birds come as far as we have?

forgive me if i am in the wrong category, i didnt know where to place this question and Philosiphy seemed to match.

Answer 1

Humans evolved from apes and then left the environment where the apes had better survival skills, specifically the dense jungle. We moved out into the plains, while our cousins that didn't evolve stayed where they had the best benefits. Our path to today has been a very long one over many different environments. It shows up in our DNA that all parts in the deep past are extremely similar. I think we are just out in front, and evolution is a very slow process, it is possible some of the animals will catch up if given enough time.

Answer 2

I have seen this lame question many times. I do not see why anyone asks it. Read more about evolution with an open mind if you can. It is difficult to answer such a question briefly. I will say that apes did not evolve into humans. They are cousins, not parents and children. There are some animals that have been here several hundred million years. How about the cockroach and coelocanth? In any case, only a few creatures evolve into new species. The rest stay as they were and survive until tough conditions may make them extinct, while fitter ones survive.

Answer 3

The reason that it's stated sometimes as 'survival of the fittest' is that to some extent staying alive means beating out other critters that are also trying to stay alive. If there's only one banana left on the tree, it's going to be hard for BOTH of us to eat it.

That direct competition for resources is an important thing to remember. As far as collecting resources, humans (collectively) beat the pants off other animals. But humans aren't really trying to get ALL the resources on the planet. And you don't have to go all that far back in history to find that there aren't even humans AROUND in most places.

So in a sense, you're right: if a bunch of humans and a bunch of apes were locked in one small area, I can't imagine that the apes would last too long. But what if they're in different areas? Ancestors of apes on one side of a mountain range might not have to worry about the ancestors of humans on the other side of the range at all. Thus we end up with TWO species surviving instead of just one. (Of course, now that humans are virtually everywhere there are many, many animals dying out because we take the stuff they need to survive!)

There is also another point to make: sometimes competition doesn't occur at a collective level. If you have a community of humans versus a community of animals, I'd bet on the humans just about every time. But sometimes there isn't a community around. One person trapped on a deserted island with a bunch of animals. There are a LOT of situations like that where I would bet against the human.

Humans have intelligence, which tends to trump other gifts, but animals DO have those other gifts. No human is going to win a wrestling match with an ape. No human is going to outrace a cheetah. And so on. Those animals do what they do VERY WELL. They ARE advanced... just not advanced intelligences. Most of them probably survive far more easily in the woods than you or I would if we were alone.

So it goes.

Answer 4

First of all, its not right to say that humans evolved from apes. Both humans and apes have evolved from some common ancestor that was neither human, nor ape like contemporary apes.
Now to the important part of the question: You say that humans are "better" or more "advanced" than other life forms. That may look logical but is something that does not have to do with evolution as a scientific theory. Evolution does not ever make judgments of that kind.It just explains how it came to be that we have so many different life forms today. It never, ever, says that some are "better" than others. Every living species is just perfect since it manages to live in its environment.
Humans are not "more advanced" than any other species; they are just different. Their most peculiar characteristic (and "advantage") is the big brain. But it is exactly from this characteristic that all their "disadvantages" come. To put it simply humans are big-heads. We have an enormous and fragile head that makes us unbalanced in our moves, requires a lot of energy and makes it necessary that we are born very early, tiny and defenseless in comparison to other animals.
The only thing that makes human look "better" is that because of their big head they have tools and technology. If you take these out and live them in the wilderness they are not better than any other animal, they are quite worst actually.

Answer 5

One of the extraordinary things about life is its diversity. There are, for example, millions of species of insects. Think about how many insects fly around - flies, mosquitos, gnats and so on. The earth is capable of supporting many different species with many different capabilites.

Apes are not the ancestors of humans. Apes and humans evolved from a common ancestor. Apes are more closely related to that common ancestor because the environment they occupied has changed little, therefore did not drive much evolution.

When dealing with humans, there is another form of evolution: survival of the deadliest. Humans kill off species, either intentional, such as the Neaderthal, or unitentionally, like the dodo or carrier pigeon, or countless other species killed by human predation.

When humans begin to encroach more into ape lands, apes may go extinct, but they remain, as do so many other species because the earth is able to support them.

Answer 6

We didn't evolve from apes, we share a common ancestor. This ancestor split off into two populations (at least two). One evolved in the savanna and led to modern humans, the other evolved in the jungle and evolved into modern apes. You are thinking of evolution as a linear line of species. It is more like a tree. The first life was the trunk. As you go up the tree (time) you end up with more and more splits. At the very tips of the branches (modern time) you have lots and lots of species.

As far as advanced species, there is not a way to quantify advanced in species terms. There are species more advanced in the ability to fly, swim, lift, etc then humans. So who is to say that they aren't more advanced then us. We are just more advanced in terms of ability to reason. And there are very little differences in the way we think and the way other intelligent animals think. But as you can see, the smallest changes can create huge differences.

Answer 7

We not in any respect reported it develop into the completed answer yet its the superb mission available through the undeniable fact that is overwhelmingly corroborated.. achievable linkages? No. fossil and DNA evidence distinctly a lot teach linkages previous purely "achievable". Yeah, there are some gaps, yet fossils are not undemanding to make. a large number of stuff receives destroyed in geological and different organic techniques. If the fossil record were finished we would see a lot extra linkages than we already do. Who reported scientists are close minded to different opportunities? Scientists are the most open minded human beings i recognize. Scientists are educated to seem on the info. The seen evidence. The measurable. The trackable. The traceable. technological expertise exist to disprove. no longer teach. The medical approach id designed to falsify. Evolution were examined extra time that you'll be able to shake a stick at. Falsification has no longer occurred. Refinement of the foundations, yet no falsification. Why are you so close minded that you could't imagine that perchance God/ a god created evolution? He/She/it/they did not supply us those brains so lets blindly follow some e book finished of dogma.

Answer 8

When Charles Darwin wrote the origin of species he was very much a christian and followed Gods law. although he felt man evolved he also knew God created man. It wasn't until when his daughter died did he turn his back on God. Charles Darwin was the beginning of science way of thinking man evolved from an ancestor and monkey did also from a weaker strand. Although I am not a Charles Darwin fan I urge you to read his book. Those who use Darwin to prove against creation have not really read his books.

Answer 9

As it has previously been stated, we didn't evolve from apes. That having been established, I would like to explain a bit about evolution.

First of all, there is an entirely separate debate over your comments on our being advanced. It is debateable. Technologically and cognitively speaking, yes. We are the most advanced species on earth. Does that make us "better" or "more evolved?" No. If anything, it's the opposite.

Evolution isn't a race. It isn't about one species being better than another, or more advanced, or more complex. Yes, through evolutionary means complexity has arisen in ever increasing amounts, but that is no indication of success.

You don't think you believe in evolution, but you do. I understand that you are pro-creation and to be honest, I don't care. Creation has nothing to do with evolution. You will not be able to honestly tell me that you are in every way exactly like your brother or sister. Nor will you tell me that you are your mother or father. You aren't even a sum of their parts.

I think that if I were to say you were something the earth has never seen before. You are brand new. Noone has ever been like you before. You would agree. Sure, you bear striking similarities to other people. That's why we call you human, but you are something that's never been on earth before. Noone has ever looked or acted exactly like you.

That's evolution. All of the rest, taxonomy, phylogeny, ontogeny. That's just labels we put on things to understand it better. Evolution itself is simply change, however small. That change is reliant upon biodiversity. The idea being the more traits there are to select from (blonde, brown, black, red, green hair, for example.) the more likely one of them is to be successful.

Imagine if I had an apple, and you had an orchard. I can hope that my apple tastes good, but if I find a worm in it, or I drop it, my apple is gone. If you have a bad apple, you can just look through the orchard and find another. Well, rather than apples, we're talking species (or genes, if you wanted to get that specific.)

Evolution isn't a challenge on any dogma. It's simply an explanation of how and why life changes.

The last thing I'd like to add is, everything on earth is ideally evolved. Dogs aren't "trying" to be something else. Everything on earth is perfectly evolved to fit it's niche in nature. As conditions change, so do they. Through natural selection. It's not a matter of getting better, it's a matter of surviving the best they can. We survive just as well as everything else on earth. No better, no worse.

Answer 10

This is a common question from the creationists and it makes no sense at all. Modern day apes descended from their early ancestors traced back to a hominid species dating over 2.7 to 4 m.y.a.

Modern man belongs to the genus Homo, which is a subgroup in the family of hominids. What evolved into Homo was likely the genus Australopithecus (once called "man-ape"), which includes the famed 3.2 million-year-old "Lucy" fossil found three decades ago.

The whole human family tree, being able to connect the branches is the life work of anthropoligists and other scientists. The great apes are man's closest cousins, they developed off the main family of hominids over 4 m.y.a.

To say that modern man descended from present day monkeys and apes is as ludicrous as saying "horses descended from zebras, so why are the zebras still around...?"