What was the common ancestor of monkey and man?

Question

Was it half monkey, half human? If it was, then the monkeys took a step backwards. Was it all monkey? If it was, then it streatches the immagination beyond it's limits. Was it all human? (???) And, lastly (though definately not leastly), what is it called and where are it's fossil remains? (I am NOT a creationist, by the way).

Jen, It's all very well to tell a 'non-believer' of the 'fact' of evolution, to "read a book. Take a course", but do you really think that all people who can't understand the evolutionists contradictory language, e.g., "theory" means, "fact", "It's inapropriate to use the word, 'proof'", and there are no 'missing links'", etc etc, should take a degree in Anthopology, so that they can become brainwashed like yourself? For all your education and qualifications, you have not been able to answer my question sufficiently enough to convince anyone that evolution is the true origin of the human being. (I repeat, especially for you 'Canute', I AM NOT A CREATIONIST, NOR RELIGIOUS IN ANY WAY!!)

Answer 1

There isn't one as there is no scientific proof for evolution....they only have theories.

Answer 2

No one has yet identified a single fossil species that was probably the ancestor for both. It was likely well before anything resembling modern monkeys developed. there are early apes that are probably our ancestors including oreopithecus, and procunsul. going further back you get into Aegyptopithecus, which appears to be an early monkey-like being probably ancestral to more modern forms (inlcuding apes). The more we look the more older species are identified, suggesting that our evolutionary tree is actually rather bushy and making it harder to pinpoint direct ancestors.

The earliest species identified as a primate - ancestral to all primates, was something similar to a modern tree shrew. Small, likely nocturnal, insectivore. At this time a number of basic patterns of all primates were set:
binocular stereoscopic vision
grasping hands
etc.

over time the descendants of that creature developed in numerous ways, leading to the ancestors of prosimians, monkeys apes and man. Based on what we can tell from the age of some fossils and a complex dating method using DNA (#of similarities, differences, rates of mutations, etc.) it looks as if the line that eventually led to humans split from the line that led to chimps somewhere around 4-8 million years ago. By this time all apes were very different from monkeys ( no tails is an easy to spot difference).

One of the main things to be aware of is that there is no recored of any modern species of primates 3 million years ago - but what there are - is variations that show more similiarities between the lines. the farther you go back the more this is evident.

Answer 3

No, it was not "half monkey, half human". It was the "common ancestor" of monkeys and man. Monkeys have evolved since then too!!

The most closely related "monkeys" to us are chimpanzees, based on genetics, including genetic clocks (which place the separation at around 5 million years ago). A possible common ancestor to us and chimpanzees is Sahelanthropus tchadensis, or, very likely, it has not been found yet. Science doesn't pressume to have all the information (and fossils of every single organism to have ever lived are not needed - there is an overwhelming mountain of evidence for evolution, and the outline of human evolution). Scientists are NOT stupid, kid.

I don't keep a record of where every fossil is kept. You can look it up in the original papers.

Answer 4

Evolution is not the origin of anything... It's what's happening all the time everywhere... When you have a baby, it's slightly different from you. When that baby in turn has babies, they are slightly more different.

If you pick an intelligent mate to breed with, your offspring will be more intelligent. If you pick a less intelligent mate, the opposite will most likely happen. Same with good looks of course. (That's why most of us subconsciously looks for looks and brains). Intelligence does of course not guarantee success, but it definitely helps.

Now imagine this process in the long run, and you will see small changes turning into big changes. That's why chinese look different from africans. We are all humans, but have adapted to different environments and different ideals.

And to answer your question (to the best of my eneducated ability, trying to use logic):

Since Humans and apes have very similar DNA structure, it is very likely that we have a common ancestor.

Have a look at this. It's long but it's worth the time:
http://richarddawkins.net/article,406,Ken-Miller-on-Intelligent-Design,Case-Western-University

There are actually information, about the common ancestry in this video. Sadly i don't have the timestamp for it, so you might have to endure the whole thing. I hope you are patient, and as interested in these things as you appear to be :)

Answer 5

It isn't truly known, it is the missing link. Think of it like this you have a line and on one point on the line is the first mammal. It evolve into different types of mammals and different populations appear onto other branches. One branch starts a line that has primate type animals. Up the line one limb branches off to monkeys and the other branch are more apelike animals. Then at some point there is this common ancestor that causes one branch with chimps, gorillas, etc. (they all branch out on their own) and the other branch is the pre-humans leading to homo erectus, and continuing to change until homo sapiens appear.
By the way Sholly, evolution is a scientific fact, read a book, take a class and learn.

Answer 6

By what we know today is that, that there were six or more species who turned to evolve in human but all extincted except Homosepians that is us ( One was Ninderthals and all others I don't remember). Some 8 millions years back we got seperated from the then so called monkeys, but after 4 millions years we again started mating with them. (Our genetic structure shows that and some other evidences are also there). And after that what happened is a missing link.

Answer 7

Monkeys ..... apes .... chimps ......... evolution being a scientific fact ............. do you people really BELIEVE what you`re saying ?

I `d like to add one question to the asker`s question ......... Archaologists can tell quite accurately what the age of a fossil is by the rock strata . Why is it that that when the strata is up to and including 6000 years old , human skeletons can be found ......... but going beyond 6000 years , NO human skeleton has EVER been found . Why did humans appear spontaneously 6000 years ago ???????????????

Answer 8

Monkey was the common ancestor: must have evolved through evolved monkeys of a few generations, to half-half monkey-man, to man! (this is the gist in simple form, from complex scientific postulates!)

Answer 9

The missing link

Answer 10

I believe it was the Neanderthal. I do recall that it was a mystery until this new fossil was discovered, as there was a missing link.

Answer 11

Matthew B:- a man having sex with a monkey does not explain how we evolved? duh...... Random.

I dont know either though, but i like the Jade goody answer, you should pick that for best just cos its sooooo funny! x x x

I'm gonna watch this question cos i dont have a clue! I just know the answer isnt a man had sex with a monkey!!

Edit: Oi Canute, below me, he said he was NOT a creationist, ie doesnt beleive in that!!! x