Is it not sufficient to negate Darwins theory of evolution ?

Question

Darwin claimed that people evolved from apes. If it is correct why are there still apes ?

Answer 1

divergent evolution, the ancestor species need not go extinct in order for the new species to evolve. and today it is accepted that we and apes evolved from a common ancestor, essentially we are distant cousins

Answer 2

Perhaps you should read his book, then you would KNOW what he said instead of hearing some one else's version. He NEVER said that!

Answer 3

This cannot be a serious question because you can spell some words.

So, don't you ever tire of this stuff?

Answer 4

The process of speciation is not very well understood even by those who should know better.  It is not really too difficult. Lets use your example.  We have a species of ape similar to Sahelanthropus, which was a bipedal ape from Chad about 6 million years ago.  It migrated and then a population hypothetically got devided resulting in two populations.  One population was stranded mostly on grassland and open woodland, the other forest.  The population in the forest became much more adapted at running through the forest and climbing trees.  These became chimps.  The population that remained in the open developed bipedal location and eventually evolved large brains.  That would be us.  This is one way two species can come from one.

Answer 5

Apes still exist because evolution is like a family tree, the apes we evolved from are now extinct and the apes alive today also evolved from extinct apes from the past.

Answer 6

Because not every creature developed the same way. Many years ago apes, monkeys and the human being seperated and developed on its own. And this development will continue until the earth blows up into a supernova. Who knows what will come in a few thousand years? Nobody can tell. But it's for sure that the earth will get destroyed in some future ahead. And if the stupid human being is going on like now and pollute the earth this won't take too long...........

It's just a matter of time until we develop backwards. And I have the feeling it has already started.

Answer 7

We all came from the ocean. Why are there still fish?

The answer is: not all animals adapted and became a new species.

Read about Darwin's theories, without prejudice to your current feelings, to understand his ideas.

Answer 8

Where does he say that, exactly? Try reading "On the origin of species", and find out what he really stated, then go to http://www.talkorigins.org if you want the the modern, updated version. Even the Roman Catholic church has accepted evolution as scientific fact. Have you?

Answer 9

This is the problem, everyone took that and ran with it, never stopping really understand. Darwin NEVER thought that we evolved from apes! He believed that apes and humans had a common ancestor and that the we and apes evolved and adapted from that ancestor, which explains why we have SOOO much in common with them. That was his theory.

Answer 10

The theory says that humans evolved ALONGSIDE apes, from a common ancestor.

Even if we evolved from apes, the continuing presence of apes would only mean that not all of the apes evolved into humans.  Not a hard leap...if Joe broke the windows in the house, but there are unbroken windows...well, Joe didn't break ALL of the windows, now did he?

Evolution has stood up to rigorous testing, has been demonstrated in the lab and observed in the wild in just the past 200 years.  The theory has accurately predicted dozens of results which have been replicated over and over.

Unlike faith, which takes an idea and sticks with it regardless of the evidence, science discards ideas when evidence goes against them.  Evolution has not been discarded because it can not be disproven by intelligent, educated, open minded people.

Answer 11

Thank GOD for copy and paste. It would take me to long if I had to type this out every time.

Evolution is not a fact. It is based on lies, lies, lies, and more lies. If people would open their eyes and see for them-self, instead of blinding following what they are told, people would see this.

Here is my usual answer to evolution questions...

Evolution is built on lies and deceptions. Only people that refuse to open their eyes and see the truth can believe in it.

Here is a small part of that truth...

Evolution teaches that we came from animals.

Evolution teaches that animals came from Amphibians.

Evolution teaches that Amphibians come from sea life.

Sea life from single-cell life.

Single cell life from chemicals.

Chemicals from rocks that were rained on for years.

Conclusion, all live came from rocks.

Which is more likely, that an intelligent created life, or that nothing did, and what about bio-genesis?

The Evolutionist base their belief in Evolution on the fact that “Micro-evolution” is true. What they do not tell is that there are 6 different meanings to the word Evolution, and only “Micro-evolution” has ever been observed.

1) Cosmic Evolution (Never Observed) The creation of time, space and matter. (The Big Bang)

2) Chemical Evolution (Never Observed) Production of heavy elements from hydrogen.

3) Steller Evolution (Never Observed) The formation of stars, planets, and solar systems.

4) Organic Evolution (Never Observed) Life from random chemical.

5) Macro-Evolution (Never Observed) One animal mutating into another.

6) Micro-Evolution. (Observed) Slight changes in a species. A better name for this would be “Adaptation”

The Sun is Shrinking.

o.1% would mean a half-life of 10,000 years, so 10,000 years ago, it would be twice as big as it is now, 20,000 years, 4 times as big, 30,000 years, 8 times as big...

The inverse square law means the gravity would be 64 times then what it is now. What would it be in 65 million years?

Carbon dating is based on 3 assumptions that can not be proven.

1. The amount of carbon-14 in the body is the same as in the air.

2. The amount that was in it at the time of death is the same as in the air today.

3. Nothing has removed or washed-out any of the carbon-14

4. The rate of decay is a constant.

1,3,and 4 are assumptions. There is no way to prove them.

2 was proven wrong at lest twice, never proven right. The amount of Carbon-14 in the air is still increasing.

The Geological Columns.

Evolutionist believe that the Geological Columns prove that the Earth is millions of years old because each layer is a different age. What they do not tell is that the layers are not even. There could be 50 layers in 1 spot, 30 layers a mile away. And 80 layers another mile.

Also they do not tell that there are trees and animals buried in the layers crossing dozens of layers and some time upside down.

There is only 2 possibilities for this...

1) The plant or animal was there for centuries waiting to be buried before it decayed. Many of the trees would have to balance upside-down, and many animal, such as whales, would have to balance on their tail fins against wind, rain, and vibrations from other animals walking/running for centuries.

2. The plant or animal was buried quickly. This would require that they be under water since only water makes dirt settle in layers quickly.

The Van-Allen Radiation Belt.

The Earths Magnetic field is slowly getting weaker. It has a half-life of 1450 years. This means that it is losing ½ of its strength every 1450 years.

Time Magnetic strength

2,000 AD 1

555 AD 2

900BC 4

2,350BC 8

3,800BC 16

About 6000 years ago (The time of Genesis) it would have been about 16 times as strong as it is now. A magnet field of that power would stop the venom of snakes from being harmful.

About 4000 to 4500 years ago (The time of The Great Flood) it would have been about 8 times as strong as now.

About 2000 years ago (The time Of Jesus, The Christ) it would have been about 3 times as strong as now.

Now, lets see how strong it would have been just 50,000 years ago.

5,250BC 32

6,700BC 64

---

50,200BC-68,719,476,736

Sixty eight Billion, Seven hundred and nineteen Million, Four hundred and seventy six thousand, seven hundred and thirty six times what is it now.

What would it have been 65,000,000 years ago?

Many Evolutionist claim that the reason the Earths magnetic field is getting weaker is because it is reversing. They say that it has reversed several times in history. If this was true then that would mean that every time it reversed, there would be a time of neutral magnetic field. This would mean that there was no magnetic field at these times. If there is no magnetic field, then there is no Van-Allen Radiation belt, and all the X-Rays, Gamma-Rays, and other forms of radiation from the sun would hit the earth directly, destroying all life on the land, and making the oceans hot enough to boil cooking all life in the waters. Evolution would have to start all over after every reversal.

How do stars form?

There are many ideas about this subject, but no way to know for sure.

Some believe that stars form from clouds of gases collecting together. As they compress closer together, they get hotter and finally ignite into a star.

This has been proven to be impossible. As the gases collect, there would be 2 forces at work. The gravity pulling them together, and the pressures pushing them apart. The pressure pushing them apart would be between 50 and 100 times stronger then the gravity pulling them together. This would be like a balloon inflating itself from the gravity of the air inside pulling more air in with no help from a outside source.

Another possible explanation would be that a star or supernova explodes close to the gas cloud.

The problem with this idea is that the shock wave would not compress the gases, it would sweep then away and scatter them even more then they are so that they can not collect. Look at a leaf blower.

Another possible explanation is that 20 stars explode at the same time all around this gas cloud.

The problem with this idea is that 20 stars would have to die for 1 to form. 400 stars would have to die for those 20 to exist, and 8,000 would have to die for those 400 to exist, and 160,000 to make them. How far back can it go, and how did the first generation of stars from?

The several stages of evolution have all been proven to be wrong.

1) Lucy.

A 3 foot skeleton of a chimp, the “evidence” that she was becoming human was her knee joint, which was found more then a mile away, and over 200 feet in the earth.

2) Heidelberg Man.

Built by a jaw bone that was considered to be quite human.

3) Nebraska Man.

Built from a pigs tooth

4) Piltdown Man.

The jaw was a modern ape

5) Peking Man.

Lived 500,000 years ago, but no remains were ever found.

6) Neanderthal Man.

Old Man with arthritis.

7) New Guinea man.

? I have never been able to find any info except that this one was found in New Guinea.

8) Gro-Magnon Man.

Skeletal Structure is exactly the same as modern man.

PS: the only diploma Darwin got other then Highschool was a docteran of divinity..

Your GREAT SCIENTIST was not a scientist at all, he was a preacher.

Lets the thumb downs begin...

Answer 12

If some christians became protestants why are there still catholics?

In a word, no. Not sufficient.

Answer 13

Evolution is a theory with plenty of gaps. From Chimps to Humans is a big jump. They don't even look at all like us. Where did the human features come from? Its more plausable that we have Extra Terrestial in our DNA and the schools won't teach that theory because they have all this time and study (money) in the Evolution theory. If you add Evolution theory+Creationist theory you get = E.T. intervention.

Answer 14

Humans and extant apes share a common ancestor. They have evolved alongside us, albeit in a different direction. Somewhere along the line (5-7 mya, based on DNA studies determining genetic divergence), two populations that were the same species became genetically isolated from one another. One of these populations became the chimps we know today, while the other led to us.  Different selective pressures on each population led to increasingly different animals in each group, because different traits were being selected for/against. For example, our ancestors became increasingly bipedal, whereas in chimps, quadrupedalism is a retained trait, that is, nothing selected against it in their ancestors, therefore they still possess it.

NO evolutionary biologist or any other advocate of evolutionary theory claims humans evolved from chimpanzees (or other living apes). The hypothesis is that we share a relatively recent common ancestor. This is based on fossil and genetic evidence.

Answer 15

It's not just Darwin's theory anymore - it's the modern synthesis of biological evolution and genetics. From your question (which is about as absurd as they come) you don't have any hope of negating or even understanding genetics... you certainly don't have a clue about evolution.

Why would you think apes must disappear just because we share a common ancestor?