05.30.10
Monkeys, humans, and evolution
Monkeys, humans, and evolution By YYAROVYY
Added: Saturday, 29 May 2010 at 08:30 PM
Hey, guys,
http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/474730-monkeys-humans-and-evolution
You probably hear this quite often: “If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys around?” Except for the obvious misconception that we “came from monkeys” instead of “we had the same evolutionary ancestor”, what do you think is the best way to respond? Why is it that if the environmental pressures affected other species differently even if they were living in the same geographic area? Thanks for your thoughts.
Arv Edgeworth said,
May 31, 2010 at 8:19 am
Why are there still monkeys is a rather dumb question. A better question might be: “If apes and humans came from an ape-like ancestor, what did it look like, if not an ape?” If Neanderthals and CroMagnon are now considered completely human, Australopithicus is now considered an ape, and Lucy was just a chimp, and we have no evidence for the ape-like ancestor, does that mean that all we really have is apes, monkeys, and humans? Plus a good imagination of course. I guess there is a reason they are called “missing.”
Darwiniana » Comment on Monkeys, humans, evolution… said,
May 31, 2010 at 12:51 pm
[...] Comment on Monkeys, humans, evolution… Arv Edgeworth said, May 31, 2010 at 8:19 am Why are there still monkeys is a rather dumb question. A better question might be: “If apes and humans came from an ape-like ancestor, what did it look like, if not an ape?” If Neanderthals and CroMagnon are now considered completely human, Australopithicus is now considered an ape, and Lucy was just a chimp, and we have no evidence for the ape-like ancestor, does that mean that all we really have is apes, monkeys, and humans? Plus a good imagination of course. I guess there is a reason they are called “missing.” [...]