Question

[ForJesusChrist]

I never post here but I have a question for those who believe in evolution. Please don't turn this into a debate, just answer the question please.

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

God Bless

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never post here but I have a question for those who believe in evolution. Please don't turn this into a debate, just answer the question please.

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

God Bless

Let me answer your question with a question:

If people in the U.S. came from Europe, Africa, and Asia why are Europe, Africa, and Asia still around?

My question is essentially the same question as yours. If you can answer my question you can answer your question.

My apologies to our member not from the U.S., I am obviously not wishing your extinction.

 

[Vergil10]

I never post here but I have a question for those who believe in evolution. Please don't turn this into a debate, just answer the question please.

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

God Bless

Humans are not descended from any modern species of monkey; both monkeys and humans are descended from some long-extinct ancestor pre-dating both. Although this species, if it were transferred to today, would be considered a "monkey", it is not any living species of monkey, further more evolution is the change in populations, not in individuals. Humans actually developed from a primate ancestor, but not an extant species of monkey or ape. and lastly evolution can lead to what we call Speciation, this occurs when something branches into two or more reproductively isolated populations or when a single species change over time to such an extent that the latter population is considered a different species. I hope this clears up some of your misunderstandings, let me know if you have questions

 

[ForJesusChrist]

Humans are not descended from any modern species of monkey; both monkeys and humans are descended from some long-extinct ancestor pre-dating both. Although this species, if it were transferred to today, would be considered a "monkey", it is not any living species of monkey, further more evolution is the change in populations, not in individuals. Humans actually developed from a primate ancestor, but not an extant species of monkey or ape. and lastly evolution can lead to what we call Speciation, this occurs when something branches into two or more reproductively isolated populations or when a single species change over time to such an extent that the latter population is considered a different species. i hope this clears up some of your misunderstandings, let me know if you have questions

What is the long-extinct ancestor, and where is the evidence?

 

[Vergil10]

What is the long-extinct ancestor, and where is the evidence?

the evidence is in the fossil record and DNA, we don't yet know exactly what the very first ancestor was but we have quite a few examples of species hat eventually evolved into Homo Sapiens

 

[USincognito]

What is the long-extinct ancestor, and where is the evidence?

There is no single long extinct ancestor. There is a lineage and we have evidence from fossils and DNA.
David Koch presents...
Human Fossils | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program
Genetics | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program

 

[Delphiki]

I never post here but I have a question for those who believe in evolution. Please don't turn this into a debate, just answer the question please.

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

God Bless

We didn't descend from chimpanzees, gorillas, or any other creature alive today. We share common ancestors with them. The time long before humans was also the time before chimpanzees, and instead lived a creature whose population would have divided and gone different ways. Each group would have been under different selective pressures from their environments and eventually have genetic traits that would only be specific to each new group. One group would continue to evolve into modern day chimpanzees, while the other would move on to be humans.

Even neanderthal was a "cousin" to modern humans and not an ancestor, as often mistaken.

The evidence? Well, there's too much to link to here, but you can go to any natural history museum to see what they have to offer. Pretty much all the archaeological evidence supports the genetic evidence supports the geological evidence, and so on.

 

[juvenissun]

I never post here but I have a question for those who believe in evolution. Please don't turn this into a debate, just answer the question please.

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

God Bless

I am not an evolutionist. But I can give you an answer better than they can:

Just like tree branches. A new branch (human) grows as an offshoot to an old branch (monkey), and both branches continue to grow. Evolutionists use this picture as an avatar of evolution.

If you want to know a term for it, it is call the idea of common ancestor. Nice idea, but it is potentially disastrous. I think it is doing more damage than help to the theory.

 

[Papias]

For wrote:

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

As SZ pointed out, the best way to understand this is to look at any ancestry. For me - I'm an American, who is mostly descended from Germans. Since I descended from Germans, why are there still Germans in Germany?

Simple - because back then, some of them came to America and led to me, and others stayed in Germany.

In the same way, about 8 million years ago, some chimp like creatures existed who led to us humans, while others of their same species stayed in the forests and evolved into today's chimps. That change was much less than our change, but that's how evolution works.

Also - understand as you look into this that many of us Christians see evolution and common descent as completely compatible with Christianity. In fact, most of those in America who support evolution are Christians. Evolution simply describes the way that God used to create, exactly as plate tectonics describes how God created mountains.

You can see more of the many ways that evolution supports Christianity at www.biologos.com.

In Christ-

Papias

PS - you also asked for evidence. To learn even a tiny fraction of the evidence would take many lifetimes - there is a huge amount of evidence showing that evolution is as well established a fact as gravity. For an overview, and a place to start learning, this one is good: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolutionists use this picture as an avatar of evolution.

Ten Icons of Evolution:

1. Miller-Urey experiment
2. Darwin's tree of life
3. Homology in vertebrate limbs
4. Haeckel's embryos
5. Archaeopteryx
6. Peppered moth
7. Darwin's finches
8. Four-winged fruit flies
9. Fossil horses
10. Hominid evolution

SOURCE

 

[juvenissun]

What is the long-extinct ancestor, and where is the evidence?

So, you are asking where (or what) is the animal right at the separation of the branches? Good question and hard question. I can not answer that (no surprise, I am not a biologist, neither an evolutionist). But you can see, those evolutionists can not answer that for you either.

There is a guy called sfs in this forum. He might give you a specific name for that animal. But, how confident he is on that? Hope he can give you an honest figure about that too.

See, the picture is: you see monkeys and human as two branches run in parallel. Then you try to find the conjunction point. But in most cases, you can not find it, and can only "suggest" one.

That is shaky, but is, tentatively, acceptable. Because we have not seen the real problem yet. Suppose some smart evolutionist threw out an odd name of extinct monkey for that: "ewrpwept". What can you do to that answer?

 

[Delphiki]

There isn't a solid line when you're talking about a gradual process.

 

[AV1611VET]

There isn't a solid line when you're talking about a gradual process.

This exercise is as deceptive as Haecke's embryos.

It dupes the weak in faith into thinking evolution is as gradual as a change in hertz.

That's why I started this thread: 1

To combat this way of thinking.

 

[Delphiki]

This exercise is as deceptive as Haecke's embryos.

It dupes the weak in faith into thinking evolution is as gradual as a change in hertz.

That's why I started this thread: 1

To combat this way of thinking.

You mean that thread where Subduction Zone demolished your attempt at making a point with the first reply?

Evolution is gradual. And for your information, there are less than 256 colors in the image I posted. I know, because I was the one who created the original post here on CF. There were less than 256 color codes in the HTML I used to get from red to blue. So, if speciation is represented by the change from red to blue, then the colors above are even far less gradual than human evolution, where speciation occurred after far more than just 256 generations.

The ones being duped are the ones that believe things on faith rather than evidence.

archive link: http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/

 

[Zosimus]

There isn't a solid line when you're talking about a gradual process.

So blue words are a different species from red words? You learn something new every day.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution is gradual.

So I've heard.

And for your information, there are less than 256 colors in the image I posted.

Okay, so you demonstrated an analog process (evolution) with a digital example.

In other words, you're expecting the reader to fill in the gaps.

And that's another pet peeve of mine: evolution is a game of connect-the-dots.

 

[Loudmouth]

I never post here but I have a question for those who believe in evolution. Please don't turn this into a debate, just answer the question please.

If we supposedly evolved from monkeys/apes/gorillas, then why are they still around?

God Bless

For the same reason that we can have chihuahuas who descended from wolves, and still have wolves.

 

[Loudmouth]

So I've heard.

Okay, so you demonstrated an analog process (evolution) with a digital example.

Actually, it would be quantized since there are discrete jumps. However, the same applies to evolution where the discrete jumps are generations.

In other words, you're expecting the reader to fill in the gaps.

And that's another pet peeve of mine: evolution is a game of connect-the-dots.

Another admission that creationists refuse to follow the evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

Another admission that creationists refuse to follow the evidence.

I call that "faith".

Believing something, even when evidence says otherwise.

 

[Zosimus]

For the same reason that we can have chihuahuas who descended from wolves, and still have wolves.

You said: "Chihuahuas who". I can't help but wonder when Chihuahuas became people.

Chihuahuas and wolves are, of course, a bad example. Since chihuahuas and wolves can breed, it's arguable that they are not two species, but rather one.