If people evolved from apes...THEN WHY ARE THERE STILL APES??? LMAO!!!?

Question

I mean seriously. There are no more...saber tooth tigers or wooly mammoths, just elephants and tigers, etc....

Answer 1

What would have happenned is within the population of species which was the common anscestors of man and the other great apes a fraction of that group split off a remained isolated somehow from the main population and through environmental pressures gained certain adaptions which led them on the way to becoming human. Eventually this subspecies of 'neo humans' changed to the point that it could no longer breed with the other population (which was also changing due to environmental pressures and became the ancestors to chimps and bonobos).

This neo human population (sorry I forgotton the proper names - Austrolopithecine?) became distinct eventaully changed again (NB most species only have a 2 million yr shelf life on earth b4 they either die out or change into something similar but different) to become homo habilus I think, then homo erectus then homo sapien i.e. modern humans. The humans tree also had a few branches i.e the neandertals.

By this time there populatioon had spred across the world in little tribal bands and each of these groups also adapting to natural, sexual and maternal selection. This is what caused the different races around the world to appear. If the different human races remained isolated no doubt in a million or so years they would have also become separate species.

Within these races there are also sub groups which if you travelled the world a hundred years ago when people rarely left the areas they were born in would have been quite distinct e.g. Chinese and Japnese look differnt even though they're both asian, italian and scottish people look different even though they're both Caucasian etc.

So now we travel the world and are slowly all interbreeding again, mixing everything up which personally I think will strengthen the human race. Within a few hundred years (genetic engineering aside) Most of the world will have dark hair dark eyes and great tans

And thats the human species in a nutshell.

All life evolved from one single celled organism that began splitting so if you look at it that way we are all related, animals, plants, fungi etc

Answer 2

Because we didn't evolve from apes.  If more people realize that God created Man, animals, earth and the solar system, maybe they will act like they had some sense.

Answer 3

The theory is that apes and humans evolved from the same predecessor, not that humans evolved from apes.

Answer 4

This is seriously my most hated argument against evolution. Humans and apes evolved from the same common animal that came before and is now extinct. Humans did not evolve from apes, they are just in the same family. It's pretty simple.

Answer 5

because certain philosophers will feed your minds with c**p to make them selves look smart when actually they are foolish.

Answer 6

Well I'm not sure. But my assumption (guessing here) might be that some of them didn't evolve completely, or something.

Answer 7

First of all, I'd like to commend you for saying apes, and not monkeys.  Most creationists don't know the distinction, so at least you've made some progress.  Let's see if we can push that progress a little further.

Think about it like this, if white Americans descended from white Europeans, why are there still white Europeans?

If the white Americans went on to develop a toe on their foreheads, and had no interbreeding with the white Europeans, there would still be white Europeans right?  And they wouldn't have a toe on their heads, because they did not descend from the white Americans, where the toe-head first originated.

Likewise, if a clan of chimpanzees separated from the rest of the chimpanzees.  And over time, they grew larger brains, started walking more upright, their body hair grew shorter and the male penises grew larger, this would have no effect on the chimpanzees.  And you would still have chimpanzees.

Now of course, we didn't evolve from chimps, but rather we share a common ancestor with them, and they have been evolving in their own way this whole time.

I hope that helps. Oh, and the reason I brought up chimpanzees instead of apes, is because, not only did we evolve from apes, but we are apes.  I didn't want to start with that tidbit though, because it's not really what your question was driving at.

I hope you check out this video.

Answer 8

People and apes evolved from a common ancestor, not from the apes that are alive today.

Answer 9

They say that people and ape's started together but then the humans branched off but even that stupid answer does not stand up for the idea of evolution.

I mean if people look at everything that points to creation they would see that the big bang theory is false and stupid. Like how the earth is the right distance from the sun where people would not freeze or burn up how there is oxygen how plants take in carbon and produce the oxygen that there are animals that pollinate the plants which keeps them around which in turn keeps us around how there is thousands of different animals on the earth and how we have senses like sight, taste, smell, hearing, and feeling their is to much to put here but millions of things that point to a creature so I agree with you about how dumb the evolution thing is.

Answer 10

did one branch come from another, NO.

we all started on the trunk.

Answer 11

If Bonobos evolved from Chimpanzees, then WHY ARE THERE STILL CHIMPANZEES??!?!!?

oh... there was genetic drift AND selective pressure? Weird...

Answer 12

Look why there are no more, the was a reason for those species being extinct. Like for the mammoths, the ice age ended.. There purpose and the strong fur they had to help them survive became useless and pointless, and so change occured to help survive with the new set of periameters

Answer 13

The perception that humans "evolved from apes" is a misnomer. Apes and human evolved from a common ancestor who descendants eventually divided into two different species of hominids.

We are their descendants, just as lions and tigers and elephants are descended from the saber tooth tigers and the Mammoths and Mastodons we find in the fossil record;  along with our "human" ancestors.

Answer 14

How many types of cats are there? How many types of elephants? How about canines?

Why did they not all die off, leaving just one species of each?

Animals branch out, species become extinct, diversity happens. It happened to all the cat species such as leopard, lion, tiger, domestic cat, and it happened to apes, including humans.

Live with it, you're an ape.

.

Answer 15

BECAUSE PEOPLE DIDN'T EVOLVE FROM APES! we share a common ancestor, so in other words humans and apes evolved at the same time from the same creature.

Answer 16

What if you had asked:

You go to the store to buy new clothes. When you come back WHY ARE THERE STILL OLD CLOTHES IN THE CLOSET?

Would that make sense? Your question appears here about every other week. You can do a search to see the numerous responses.

From the National Academy of Sciences:

"If humans evolved from apes, why are there still apes?

     Humans did not evolve from modern apes, but humans and modern apes shared a common ancestor, a species that no longer exists. Because we share a recent common ancestor with chimpanzees and gorillas, we have many anatomical, genetic, biochemical, and even behavioral similarities with these African great apes. We are less similar to the Asian apes--orangutans and gibbons--and even less similar to monkeys, because we share common ancestors with these groups in the more distant past.

     Evolution is a branching or splitting process in which populations split off from one another and gradually become different. As the two groups become isolated from each other, they stop sharing genes, and eventually genetic differences increase until members of the groups can no longer interbreed. At this point, they have become separate species. Through time, these two species might give rise to new species, and so on through millennia. "

http://www.nap.edu/html/creationism/appe...

From Straight Dope:

Why isn't this argument used against evolution? Well, it is--it's just used incorrectly. Let's start with a quote from the recently re-released publication, Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences (Second Edition).   In the section on "Human Evolution," the publication notes, "today there is no significant scientific doubt about the close evolutionary relationships among all primates, including humans."

Evolution doesn't work as a simple find-and-replace function. Have you ever seen the evolutionary "tree" diagrams in a science book?  Those trees show how different species branch off and go in different evolutionary directions. That doesn't necessarily mean everything else dies. As the National Academy of Sciences document notes, archaeological finds "reveal a well-branched tree, parts of which trace a general evolutionary sequence leading from ape-like forms to modern humans."

The NAS publication actually answers your question directly in its Appendix of Frequently Asked Questions. It says:

"Humans did not evolve from modern apes, but humans and modern apes shared a common ancestor, a species that no longer exists. Because we share a recent common ancestor with chimpanzees and gorillas, we have many anatomical, genetic, biochemical, and even behavioral similarities with these African great apes. We are less similar to the Asian apes orangutans and gibbons and even less similar to monkeys, because we share common ancestors with these groups in the more distant past.

"Evolution is a branching or splitting process in which populations split off from one another and gradually become different. As the two groups become isolated from each other, they stop sharing genes, and eventually genetic differences increase until members of the groups can no longer interbreed. At this point, they have become separate species. Through time, these two species might give rise to new species, and so on through millennia."

In other words, the "ape-like" animals that eventually gave rise to humans split up into several branches, all of which evolved in different directions. Some of those lines became become extinct; others survived. One of the surviving groups includes you and me (and in theory P.E. teachers, although one wonders). Other survivors include the various species of monkeys and apes we find today.

So, John, I've convinced you, right? Attaboy--always nice to have another ally in the fight against ignorance. Incidentally, you can find the NAS publication on the web at http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/. Lots of good info in there!

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mevo...

Just to set the record straight from some red herring claims:

“Piltdown man – fraud”

As it was exposed by the scientific community, what’s the issue?Piltdown Man was alleged to have been “discovered in 1915. However it was universal “French and American paleontologists tended to be skeptical, some objected quite vociferously. The objectors held that the jawbone and the skull were obviously from two different animals and that their discovery together was simply an accident of placement. In the period 1912-1917 there was a great deal of skepticism…During the next two decades there were a number of finds of ancient hominids and near hominids, e.g. Dart's discovery of Australopithecus, the Peking man discoveries, and other Homo erectus and australopithecine finds. Piltdown man did not fit in with the new discoveries… In the period 1930-1950 Piltdown man was increasingly marginalized and by 1950 was, by and large, simply ignored..”

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown...

For almost all the period 1915 to the 1950 all that could be examined were plaster casts, the bones being locked up by the owner. However in 1951 “The original Piltdown teeth were produced and examined by the three scientists. The evidence of fake could seen immediately.”

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown...

Conclusion, Piltdown was a fraud that was never accepted by the general scientific community.

“Java man - a few teeth, and a few skull and bone fragments”

The variation to this is “Peking Man all bones have disappeared.” Homo Erectus is the correct term used to describe “Java Man”, and “Peking Man.” Further “At least 222 fossils of Homo erectus have been found to date throughout Africa, Asia, Australia and Europe”

http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/emhe.h... (A creation science site)

“The bones of Peking Man discovered in the cave in the hill's north face include six complete or relatively complete skulls, eight skull fragments, six pieces of facial bone, 15 mandibles, 153 teeth, seven sections of broken femur, one broken shinbone, three pieces of upper arm bone, one clavicle and one wrist bone belonging to more than 40 individuals of different ages and sexes”

http://www.china.org.cn/english/MATERIAL...

So much for “few teeth, and a few skull and bone fragments”

“Nebraska man - a pigs tooth”

“In 1922, solely on the basis of a worn fossil tooth from Nebraska, paleontologist Henry Fairfield Osborn described Hesperopithecus haroldcookii as the first anthropoid ape from North America. Five years later, Osborn's colleague William King Gregory concluded that the tooth most likely came from an extinct peccary.”

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/wol...

So and “ape” but not a man. The issue was over in 1927 some 80 plus years ago. Where did the “man” come from? The Illustrated London News had one of their artists paint what a British anatomist “thought” it should look like. “Osborn and his colleagues at the American Museum were not impressed with Forestier's handiwork and felt that "such a drawing or 'reconstruction' would doubtless be only a figment of the imagination of no scientific value, and undoubtedly inaccurate." (Anon., 1922)

Finally “Forestier's reconstruction of Nebraska Man was not reproduced in any other contemporary publication and has only recently been "rediscovered" and reprinted by critics of evolution (e.g., Hitching, 1982; Bowden, 1981; see also Fix, 1984).”

Strangely I ran into these same claims back in the 1970s. There was a fundamentalist by Chick cartoon handout that made these same claims. It’s supposedly has been updated but nothing has changed from the 70s.

This is all a red herring intended to confuse and distract, nothing more

Answer 17

The apes that we are evolved from are gone. There were even some human types that we came from that are gone.  We are related to present day apes the way house cats are related to tigers and lions. Boy, my cat would freak out if confronted with those big boys. lol

Answer 18

We didn't evolve from apes, dummy. We're just related to them.

Answer 19

Hmm... They are different species...

People didn't came from just one ape, but evolution came from different species of apes... the apes we have now are other species...

The belong to the same family (apes), but are not the same...

So, yes... Sabertooth tiger do not exist now; but tigers, lions, cheetah and many other cat relative exist nowadays... Think of evolution as something with branches... they branches that are not strong enough and don't get to adapt, are left behing and so, the species cease to exist...

Answer 20

There is scant evidence to support the hypothesis that man has evolved from an ape-like creature.

Even those that think that apes and humans did evolve from some common ancestor, would surely acknowledge that this alleged common ancestor would look very like an ape. So nothing wrong in calling it an ape!

If it wsn't an ape then just what was it? Got a picture?

All hominid fossils are clearly human or clearly ape.

History is full of frauds and wishful thinking in regard to alleged missing links:

Piltdown man – fraud

Java man - a few teeth, and a few skull and bone fragments

Nebraska man - a pigs tooth

Australopithecene (Lucy) - portrayed with human like hands and feet despite the fact that it is known to have ape like hands and feet.

To believe we evolved from an ape requires an awful lot of faith! It flies in the face of the evidence, and of scientific knowledge.

http://creationontheweb.com/content/view...

Answer 21

yeah, i don't think we evolved from apes either