Characteristics

[AirPo]

That shot came from Battle For The Planet of The Apes, the fifth generation.

 

[EternalDragon]

Since when is it an evolutionary rule that species look like ancestral species?

Well, they usually do as far as I can see.

I am not sure why that one person posted picture of dogs and couldn't see a resemblance but then does see a resemblance in humans and apes which is even less distinct.

Tikaalik looks like a fish, and there are actually fish alive today that are nearly identical to the Tikaalik, called Crocodile fish. But what I am referring to is speciation within kinds. From a penguin to a stork, etc. They still have the basic characteristics intact.

Humans, as far as I can see, do not have the basic characteristics of apes intact. My question is basically, if we did evolve from apes, why don't we still look like (Planet of the apes) apes?

In the new planet of the apes movie they digitally made the chimp have more human eyes, ears and mouth to make it look more convincing as becoming more "intelligent" or evolving.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Well, they usually do as far as I can see.

I am not sure why that one person posted picture of dogs and couldn't see a resemblance but then does see a resemblance in humans and apes which is even less distinct.

Tikaalik looks like a fish, and there are actually fish alive today that are nearly identical to the Tikaalik, called Crocodile fish. But what I am referring to is speciation within kinds. From a penguin to a stork, etc. They still have the basic characteristics intact.

Humans, as far as I can see, do not have the basic characteristics of apes intact. My question is basically, if we did evolve from apes, why don't we still look like (Planet of the apes) apes?

In the new planet of the apes movie they digitally made the chimp have more human eyes, ears and mouth to make it look more convincing as becoming more "intelligent" or evolving.

Well we actually evolved from something pretty similar to what you see in planet of the apes (the old one) minus a small number of the chimp features, so that looked a tad closer to human than other modern apes I suppose. But have you seen what whales evolved from? That should put to rest any ideas that we have to look like our predecessors. Plus, we do look like apes, we just might not think we do as a result of there being a section of our brain dedicated to recognizing human faces in greater detail than any other animal, which give the illusion that humans stand out.

 

[andy b]

Thats a good point ive always wondered myself why we dont look like apes if we evolved from some sub species,another point ive raised a few times without any real reply is why do some species not evolve through mutation surely this rule applies to all nature ...im think along the lines of horseshoe crab etc which from what im led to believe have been around millions of years.

 

[EternalDragon]

Well we actually evolved from something pretty similar to what you see in planet of the apes (the old one) minus a small number of the chimp features, so that looked a tad closer to human than other modern apes I suppose. But have you seen what whales evolved from? That should put to rest any ideas that we have to look like our predecessors. Plus, we do look like apes, we just might not think we do as a result of there being a section of our brain dedicated to recognizing human faces in greater detail than any other animal, which give the illusion that humans stand out.

I don't believe whales evolved from anything.

I am addressing speciation and not really evolution.

 

[lasthero]

Tikaalik looks like a fish, and there are actually fish alive today that are nearly identical to the Tikaalik, called Crocodile fish.

Crocodile Fish only have a head that resembles Tiktaalik, and even that's only a passing resemblance. They are not 'nearly identical'. You are grossly overstating, and being borderline dishonest.

My question is basically, if we did evolve from apes, why don't we still look like (Planet of the apes) apes?

Because that's a movie. It's not real.

Now, are you asking why our hair is shorter or why we're bipedal? That's an interesting question. But asking why we don't look like character from a 1968 movie is silly.

 

[EternalDragon]

Crocodile Fish only have a head that resembles Tiktaalik, and even that's only a passing resemblance. They are not 'nearly identical'. You are grossly overstating, and being borderline dishonest.



Because that's a movie. It's not real.

Now, are you asking why our hair is shorter or why we're bipedal? That's an interesting question. But asking why we don't look like character from a 1968 movie is silly.

I am asking why we don't resemble walking apes or walking primates, which we do not. The picture from the film is merely a representation of what we should look like, had we evolved/speciated from apes/primate animals. It should not have taken you this long to realize that.

 

[lasthero]

I am asking why we don't resemble walking apes

We do.

ot. The picture from the film is merely a representation of what we should look like

Who says? You? On what do you base the conclusion that we should look like that?

I also notice that you skipped over my point about the crocodile fish. That's the second time I've seen you try to peddle that lie. You're not going to do it again, are you?

 

[selfinflikted]

I am asking why we don't resemble walking apes or walking primates, which we do not.

Yes, we really do. Why are you so opposed to seeing this?

 

[sfs]

I am asking why we don't resemble walking apes or walking primates, which we do not. The picture from the film is merely a representation of what we should look like, had we evolved/speciated from apes/primate animals. It should not have taken you this long to realize that.

We look exactly like walking apes or walking primates whose fur has gotten much thinner. That's why we've been classified with the primates (and the apes) since well before Darwin.

 

[andy b]

Yes, we really do. Why are you so opposed to seeing this?

speak for yourself monkey boy

 

[lasthero]

I don't believe whales evolved from anything.

I am addressing speciation and not really evolution.

You know, there's a bit of a different between the variation we see in finches and the variation between housecats and tigers. They're too completely different species. Genetically speaking, they're farther apart than humans are to apes.

 

[Loudmouth]

The Planet of the Apes depiction really isn't that far off. Australopithecines have adaptations for bipedality while still retaining the ancestral prognathus seen in other apes.

 

[EternalDragon]

We do.



Who says? You? On what do you base the conclusion that we should look like that?

I also notice that you skipped over my point about the crocodile fish. That's the second time I've seen you try to peddle that lie. You're not going to do it again, are you?

It's no lie. They closely resemble each other but could easily have speciated like Darwins Finches. What are you afraid of?

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

If an ape did evolve into a man or split from a chimp to become a man or whatever the current consensus is, why would it not look like this? While driving cars and playing scrabble.

Yeah I'll bite.

Out of interest, why would you expect an ape-man to be able to walk upright while still retaining it's fur? Why not expect, for example, an ape-man to walk on all fours but be bald like a human?

(To any evolutionists reading this: yes, I am aware we do have animals, like the Australopithecines, which were hairy and walked upright but this is just a personal question to EternalDragon. )

 

[EternalDragon]

The Planet of the Apes depiction really isn't that far off. Australopithecines have adaptations for bipedality while still retaining the ancestral prognathus seen in other apes.

That picture and hypothesis is just as fantastic as the planet of the apes picture I posted. (But without clothing and guns). Yet I doubt I will be seeing anyone calling your picture silly. (basically a depiction of apes in an upright position. The same as planet of the apes.)

 

[EternalDragon]

Yeah I'll bite.

Out of interest, why would you expect an ape-man to be able to walk upright while still retaining it's fur? Why not expect, for example, an ape-man to walk on all fours but be bald like a human?

(To any evolutionists reading this: yes, I am aware we do have animals, like the Australopithecines, which were hairy and walked upright but this is just a personal question to EternalDragon. )

It still has ape characteristics. Fur or no fur.

 

[Loudmouth]

That picture and hypothesis is just as fantastic as the planet of the apes picture I posted. (But without clothing and guns).

I guess you are unaware that they are based on real fossils?

 

[Loudmouth]

It still has ape characteristics. Fur or no fur.

It has the ape characteristics that we have. Look at the shape and placement of the muscles.

 

[EternalDragon]

I guess you are unaware that they are based on real fossils?

Fossils of ape animals. Yes, I am aware.