Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The answer is that modern monkeys are not the same as their ancient ancestors any more than we are.
So now we have a third answer.
For arguments sake, let's say you are correct. Modern monkeys are different than their ancestors. So ancient monkey evolved to ancient human and then continued on to become modern monkey that, for some reason, stopped evolving.
How do you back up that claim? At what point did ancient monkey say we've evolved enough already. Let's stop here.
Poor analogy. Americans and Europeans are exactly the same species, living in two different areas. Is this the best argument you can make? Wow!
The point is not about how species changed, as that was not the point of the question 'why are there still monkeys/'. The point is, why if monkeys evolved, are there still monkeys who stayed as they are are?
Now you see that the answer in relevant. Like Europeans who did not sail to America and stayed just as they were, many monkeys were happy enough in their environment and so there was no pressure to evolve.
In fact even the reasons why some europeans went to America is also 'ecological pressure' which is why some primates did evolve.
Now, while I see the point of your response do you see the point of mine?
If you want to ask how it was that some primates evolved into another species rather than why some didn't, then you need a different question than the 'why are there still monkeys?' one.
I do hope someone is passing this stuff onto Ken Ham. he may need it.
For arguments sake, let's say you are correct. Modern monkeys are different than their ancestors. So ancient monkey evolved to ancient human and then continued on to become modern monkey that, for some reason, stopped evolving.
How do you back up that claim? At what point did ancient monkey say we've evolved enough already. Let's stop here.
While kaboom's response is helpful and correct; the prehistoric monkey was not the same as the modern one - it isn't addressing the question. Which is, why they all didn't evolve into humans. My answer does. In fact the monkeys picture is over - simple. There were many primates, including lemurs some of which evolved into other species, some of which just 'micro' changed. It depended on a number of factors, ecological and genetic. It wasn't (of course) a 'that'll do, let's take the rest of the Oligocene off.' decision.
As to how the claim is backed up, the fossil record shows the process of evolution. And in anticipation of an impatient dismissal, I'd ask where is the evidence that they didn't evolve? No, that some monkeys didn't evolve is not evidence against - that is explained.
No, peeing over the fossils and dismissing their evidence is rejecting evidence FOR evolution - it is not evidence against.
No, it isn't to be found in that silly myth of Creation.
At what point did ancient monkey say we've evolved enough already.
Iwish, I have wondered the same thing, but not about monkeys.
When I was a kid, I used to find horseshoe crabs on the beach and think they were ugly, but now I think they are absolutely beautiful. From what the scientists say, they have not evolved much in millions of years, and I wonder why. Maybe the scientists will discover that certain genetic types are less likely to produce mutations that lead to new species.
On the other hand, maybe evolution has a lot to do with a changing environment. When the world had lots of jungles, monkeys fit in just fine. When the grasslands began to appear, most monkeys didn't like them, but the monkeys that could walk better moved into the grasslands and eventually evolved into humans.
That is one great advantage we have over apes - we can move better over long differences. On the other hand, test have shown that chimps have much better memories than humans, so we can't be best at everything.
You are quite right. The 'Living fossil' thing is a big question. In a way, none of the species have really gone extinct; some have just micro-evolved more than others.
For arguments sake, let's say you are correct. Modern monkeys are different than their ancestors. So ancient monkey evolved to ancient human and then continued on to become modern monkey that, for some reason, stopped evolving.
How do you back up that claim? At what point did ancient monkey say we've evolved enough already. Let's stop here.
There is no such thing as 'stopped evolving'. Using that expression is the function equivalent of admitting you have you no understanding of evolution.
You, by asking Why are monkeys still around if humans evolved from monkeys?, imply that evolving from monkeys means that monkeys should be extinct. But nothing - nothing - in evolution (as I previously pointed out to you, and which you conveniently ignored) requires that ancestral populations become extinct.
So let me make this simple: What in evolution requires that species/clades ancestral to modern species not be extant?
Unless you can answer that, your question about why monkeys still exist is meaningless - except to highlight your confusion. And you can't answer it precisely because there is no such requirement.
Now you see that the answer in relevant. Like Europeans who did not sail to America and stayed just as they were, many monkeys were happy enough in their environment and so there was no pressure to evolve.
Fine, so some monkeys were pressured into evolving into humans for whatever reason. So how did they do that? And why did they evolve into a species that needed even more protection. For example, a monkey is good to go naked and barefoot, hanging from a tree. If he can't take that pressure, why evolve to something that needs so much more to survive? Really now, how long a human being survive on bananas and coconuts?
Every time you answer one question, you open a new can of worms.
Fine, so some monkeys were pressured into evolving into humans for whatever reason. So how did they do that? And why did they evolve into a species that needed even more protection. For example, a monkey is good to go naked and barefoot, hanging from a tree. If he can't take that pressure, why evolve to something that needs so much more to survive? Really now, how long a human being survive on bananas and coconuts?
Every time you answer one question, you open a new can of worms.
You mean that, every time a question is answered you go look for another one. How, it happened, and Why it resulted in a species that wasn't invincible is not really relevant to the debate. The evidence indicates that it did happen and if there is evidence that it didn't, you go and find it.
Quibbles and requests for further clarification is not in the order of a meaningful disproof of evolution.
However, the questions you ask,
(1) So how did they do that? The indications are that a climate change in Africa opened up areas of space between copses of trees. Thus the arboreal inhabitants were obliged to use their bipedal abilities (which modern chimps have) more regularly, and bipedalism evolved (as shown in the 'Lucy' skeleton).
(2) And why did they evolve into a species that needed even more protection. For example, a monkey is good to go naked and barefoot, hanging from a tree. If he can't take that pressure, why evolve to something that needs so much more to survive? Really now, how long a human being survive on bananas and coconuts?
As it says in 'A man for all seasons' "A lifetime, if necessary." If humans can't survive on bananas and coconuts, it is because their stomach bacteria can't evolve quick enough. However, given time and a large enough human group, they have and could adapt to such a diet.
In fact, It was forced into a more dangerous environment, which is why it was 'evolve or die'. Tool -use, bipedalism, social cohesion and problem - solving were all forced onto Australopithecus by conditions, and they were almost not enough, in the Ice age. The tool - making, problem -solving and social organization gave us the edge and humans survived. Monkeys and a lot of others, didn't. Of course in the rain - forest where the problem hadn't arisen, they lived on bananas and coconuts quite happily, which is why there were no humans, until they migrated there.
Now will you provide a case of your own or do you have yet more quibbles and demands for yet more explanation?
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-03-2014 at 11:33 AM..
Only for those unable, or unwilling to understand the truth.
Christians when stumped: You're blind to the truth
Evolutionists/atheists when stumped: You're blind to the truth
Quote:
You mean that, every time a question is answered you go look for another one. How, it happened, and Why it resulted in a species that wasn't invincible is not really relevant to the debate. The evidence indicates that it did happen and if there is evidence that it didn't, you go and find it.
If you're going to claim it happened, you should know HOW it happened. You're the one claiming science has the answers, not I. The questions are quite simple: You said monkeys were pressured into evolving. If so, why did they evolve into something that needs even more protection from the elements. The question is simple. The answers make no sense, or as much sense as a virgin birth being the "great big miracle for all the world to see the truth."
Quote:
Now will you provide a case of you own or do you have yet more quibbles and demands for yet more explanation?
The onus of proving evolution lies on you. Nobody has ever seen anything evolving from simple to complex, from one species to another, from non living to living. Nobody has recreated evolution in a petri dish. When has the core essence of science changed from being able to reproduce something to prove it actually happens to believing a scientist.
Last edited by iwishiwerethin; 01-03-2014 at 11:35 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
do you see the point of mine? 
If humans can't survive on bananas and coconuts, it is because their stomach bacteria can't evolve quick enough. However, given time and a large enough human group, they have and could adapt to such a diet.
