Man's Evolution???????

Question

If man evolved from monkeys and apes, why do we still have monkeys and apes?

Answer 1

Man didnt really evolve from monkeys and apes., theories suggest that we evolved along with our primate relatives, so from an ancient ancestor , the gene pool diverged into 2 branches, homosapiens and primates.

Answer 2

Man did not evolve from apes. Man AND apes evolved from a common ancestor.

Evolution diagram is like a tree, starting from main trunk, then branching out to many different species.

Evolution is not dubious. It is happening right here and now. The effects of evolution have seen some new species recorded in the past few decades.

If you are truly ignorant about evolution, you could check it out at http://www.talkorigins.org/. This website is done up (through not updated regularly) by scientist in the related field. It is quite comprehensive.

Answer 3

Lets say that a group of humans are sent to Mars and get stuck there for generation and generations(hypothetically speaking)... This group would be away from the rest of humanity...and-so when a mutation occurs in the Martian-humans, that mutation would have a likelier chance of being passed down through out the population more quickly than it would be on the Earth-humans (because there are millions and millions of earth humans).

Now, lets say that in Mars enough mutations occur (after hundreds or thousands of generations) to make them a different species of human (meaning, they can no longer mate with an earth-human and produce children).

That doesn't mean that Earth-humans disappear... it just means that the Mars-humans are a different species.

That is why there are apes and monkeys and humans. Because Humans are just a different type of Ape then the ones that exist now.

BTW: The apes that we derive from no longer exist.

Answer 4

it is not auctually weare evolved from apes&monkeyes,but our fore fathers resemeled them.IT IS A MYSTREY.

Answer 5

The first concept to understand in this discussion is that humans did not evolve from contemporary apes or monkeys. Our evolutionary precursor was what is called a "common ancestor" who was ape but not recognizable as a modern ape. The next step in answering your question is to understand what evolution is. Evolution is conditional on variability within a population, and how this variation is selected for within the environment via reproductive success. This is the primary aspect of evolution important to this discussion.

Now, not only are modern Apes NOT our common ancestor, but they have also followed their own separate evolutionary paths since our divergence from our common ancestor. Our closest relatives (chimpanzees and bonobos) have continued to evolve during their 6-7 million years of separate evolution to their distinct environments. Of course seeing as their generational spacing is large, like it is with humans, this evolution is more difficult to see within a small time frame as well. Evolution, however, is based primarily on reproductive success whereby the most fit individuals within given environments will produce the most offspring and the characteristics which provided that success will spread amongst the group. Let me give you some examples of evolution occurring within Chimpanzees and Bonobos. These two primate species diverged from our common ancestor around 6-7 mya and then consequently split from their shared common ancestor 2-2.5 mya. In this time an array of distinct differences have evolved that make these two species very distinguishable from one another and these differences are clearly from environmental pressures. The bonobos, for instance practice bipedalism much more frequently then Chimpanzees and also have a drastically different means of conflict resolution, where as chimpanzees are much more quadrepedal, aggressive and competitive. So why have these characteristics sprung up in the mere 2my since these two groups were isolated from each other because of the changing flow of a river which geographically split their common ancestor into two groups? Well, the bonobos were restricted into a more swamp like/arboreal environment, which was confined in space, where as the chimpanzees were left in a savanna/arboreal mixed environment, which was expansive. The swampy aspect of the bonobo habitat forced them to practice bipedalism frequently because their terrain was not fully traversable without adapting to this strategy periodically. Those individuals who were better adapted became better foragers in providing access to resources and removing these same food resources from swampy areas and this characteristic has been selected for over generations. Chimpanzees meanwhile have found great success in being primarily quadrapedal because the mixed arboreal savanna environment has no selective advantage towards being bipedal much to the chagrin of contemporary anthropology. I wish that they could look at the primates that have adapted more bipedalism (proboscis for traversing mangrove forests, crab eating macaques when carrying their shellfish to shore, Japanese macaques when bathing in the hot springs) before jumping to their foolish "mixed" hypothesis conclusion. The other differential traits between bonobos and chimpanzees that are very apparent are in how they deal with conflict resolution. Bonobos, who live in a confined environment, rarely result in full out conflict. They have a culture of threat displays and sexual resolution techniques that are fully employed before conflict arises. This includes running bipedaly while dragging sticks, to p***s fencing, to female genital genital rubbing. They appear to be bi-sexual at first, but upon further observation it becomes obvious that these rituals are all about relieving stress and combativeness in a controlled manner and they are not actually s*x crazy primates as some have portrayed them. Quite honestly, because of their confined space this group of primates can not afford to fight aggressively because conflicts would be too frequent and too costly to the group, so other means of conflict resolution have formed to adapt to this confined environment. Chimpanzees, alternatively, do not have this confined environment and are an ultra competitive group of primates who tend to use physical dominance to acquire a higher ranking thus hopefully attaining more reproductive opportunities. Chimpanzees have also been observed to conduct warfare and will murder males from neighbouring groups and they have clearly defined territories. If bonobos were to live like this they would no longer exist today because their troops show much more overlap between one another and conflicts and murders would have become far to commonplace if they lived like chimpanzees. Research at Yerkes primate research center has utilized interactive and educational tools to determine the cognitive abilities of both of these primate species and as would be expected and corroborates what field observations would predict, bonobos are much better communicators, where as chimpanzees are much better tool makers. So, evolution has continued in our closest relatives since our divergence with them yet they have not become much more like us over that period.

As you can see all primates, including humans, are in a constant state of evolution. If an environment on a macro scale is no longer very influential like is seen with humans especially, then there is little reason for any noticeable phenotypic expression that might cause noticeable morphological changes. Undoubtedly, however, the environment on a micro scale is much more active due to the extremely short generational cycle of micro organisms and, as-of-such, this rapidly changing micro-environment is constantly being adapted to and evolution at this level is very apparent within all primates.

Clearly evolution has not stopped in any primate species, human or other. But considering that evolution is from a "common ancestor" and not from any contemporary species then there is a questions that is 100% equivalent to yours which may put yours into perspective.

If evolution is true and Chimpanzees have evolved from Humans, then why do we still have humans?

After all both of these species are equidistant from our common ancestor so the coin may be flipped. Evolution is NOT progressive, simply adaptive and Chimpanzees are just as well adapted to their environment as humans are at modifying our own environments instead of adapting to them.

So that you may take less offense I will put two more examples for you to ponder, that of my example of Bonobos and Chimpanzees, both of which are equidistant to their own common ancestor and have experienced 2-2.5 my of separate evolutionary paths.

If evolution is true and Chimpanzees have evolved from Bonobos, then why do we still have Bonobos?

If evolution is true and Bonobos have evolved from Chimpanzees, then why do we still have Chimpanzees?

Like I said, when you pretend that modern species are equivalent to a common ancestor then the coin can be flipped and it starts to sound pretty ridiculous!

I hope that this clarifies your question for you!

Answer 6

Thats it, we didnt come from apes, if we did, were did the apes come from?

Answer 7

Evolution is not a family tree- its more like a family bush. Humans are simply one sub-group of a large and continuously evolving group of primates.

Humans did not evolve directly from current day monkeys and apes, but we are very very closely related as cousins (to apes. monkeys not so much). they continued to evolve in parallel with humans, but just in a different vector.

And yes, monkeys and apes are continuously evolving...its just that evolution is a long process, occurring over millions of years.

Answer 8

Some monkeys were intelligent so they did not become human beings.