English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Please esplain.

Ding a ling a ling

(more drooling)

2007-06-25 09:32:03 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Biology

10 answers

I am not an atheist, but I answered this question last week, and I'm willing to answer it again.

We did not evolve from monkeys. We shared a common ancestor with monkeys. From that common ancestor evolved a lineage that developed into monkeys and another that developed into human beings. Thus, it is possible for monkeys and human being to exist at the same time, as in fact they do.

2007-06-25 09:41:52 · answer #1 · answered by justjennith 5 · 3 0

Because compared to monkeys people aren't very good at living high in the trees.

Because it takes more foraging room in a jungle to feed a human than it does an ape. You can get more apes for your money. They're just better at it because they don't have the calorie furnace we have between our ears.

See, the creationists were right about one thing, smarts aren't everything. You can be a dummy and still be a successful monkey. Especially if you have a rich politically connected daddy like our chimp in chief Dubya.

What does evolution have to do with atheism BTW? I'd be happy to say it disproves the existence of supernatural agencies, like gods, but it doesn't. It just renders them redundant.

2007-06-26 03:58:14 · answer #2 · answered by corvis_9 5 · 0 0

It's a matter of isolated populations. The best example is of moths in Britian during the industrial revolution. As the burning of coal became very popular the amount of fall out pollution increased greatly. A black residue became encrusted on the trees where these moths lived. Since the moths were white they stuck out like a sore thumb.
These moths did have a recessive trait which allowed provided the possibility of a dark coating. These were the moths which continued to survive flipping the dominance of the moths.
Man on the other had, would have evolved from a group of animals pushed to their limits of adaptability.
eg. with no trees as the means of primary transporation man would have been forced to walk on foot for energy conservation.
eg. intellect may have arisen due to the neccessity to live in clusters, group hunting, and as a nomadic animal the environment would have constantly been changing and adaptations constantly occuring.

2007-06-25 09:44:36 · answer #3 · answered by Arch Teryx 3 · 1 0

*drink*

Australians and Americans are descended from Europeans, so why are Europeans still here?

Edit:
We did indeed evolve from monkeys. If I handed you a picture of that common ancestor you're talking about, you would immediately describe it as "old world monkey, hitherto unidentified species." Monkey is monkey, and yes we do call extinct monkeys monkeys.

I think I get another drink for pointing this out ... YET AGAIN to people who should KNOW BETTER.

2007-06-25 11:46:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This spurious anti-evolution argument certainly has legs. Evolutionary theory does not state that humans evolved from apes, but rather that humans and apes share a common ancestor. At some point in the past, the lines branched and took separate evolutionary paths.

2007-06-25 09:36:20 · answer #5 · answered by JLynes 5 · 2 0

Because we evolved from an earlier form of monkeys, not the chimpanzees that are around today. We split from a common ancestor.

2007-06-25 09:46:15 · answer #6 · answered by Gregory Casamento 1 · 1 0

Qwerty, watch this space for this question to be answered almost every single day.....

As others have said, were are nor evolved "from" monkeys but share a common ancestor. Just like you and your cousins came from your grandparents but just because you were born doesn't mean your cousins went extinct.

Go ahead and drool.

We are cousins to primates living today. We are great apes, just like gorillas and chimpanzees and orangutans. We are cousins of these other great apes. Our ancestors are just older than grandparents or great grandparents.

2007-06-25 10:25:35 · answer #7 · answered by Joan H 6 · 1 0

We evolved away from a niche which the monkeys dominanted, i.e. trees to a seperate niche where we weren't in direct competition with them. Though at the rate we're going at deforestation, in a few years, there probably won't be any monkeys left.

2007-06-25 09:36:27 · answer #8 · answered by IamSpazzy 2 · 1 0

Do you have something against atheists? Why didn't you ask a Christian or Buddhist. Besides we didn't evolve from monkeys, we're cousins at best, and they're still here because humans haven't caused their extinction yet.

2007-06-25 16:05:13 · answer #9 · answered by dark bubble 7 · 0 0

because of the fact the genetic mutation that brought about the evolution to human beings occured in a small share of the inhabitants of apes, no longer the best deal. additionally, i think of you propose "evolutionists", no longer athiest. Athiest is a little extra of an umbrella term. some human beings have faith in God, and interior the assumption of evolution. no longer many, yet some.

2016-10-03 03:02:20 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers