ANSWERS: 47
  • If you met my mother-in-law, you would too!!!!!!
  • I don't know, probably. Does it really matter?
  • No, nor do evolutionary scientists. The theory of evolution doesn't suggest we ever evolved from monkeys or apes.
  • No I do not.
  • No I totally don't think we did. How would we have all this...i mean the land, the water, air. It just doesn't make sense to say we came from a bunch of monkeys....along with that where did they come from to begin with??
  • Many are.
  • Personally NO. But it can't be supported one way or another, so there is no point in discussing it. It's sad for me to think that we were all just a bunch of poo flinging, hairy, disgusting monkeys, but then again there are some apes that are more civilized than humans!!;)
  • We did not evolve from apes.
  • No. And neither does anyone else. It's like asking if I am desendant from my brother. Humans and apes had a common ancestor some millions of years back.
  • There's no way I can say this without being corrected on the specifics, but humans deffinately evolved from something. Not apes, which we are related to, but did not evolve from.
  • Chimpanzees and humans evolved from the same ancestor, australopithicines, over 6 million years ago.
  • I believe that there was evelution of some sort going on, but not from apes. I can't really describe the why of it other than, if apes evolved into humans, why are there still apes?
  • AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Once again, no, there is nothing about evolution, Darwin, etc that says we evolved from apes, monkeys, chimps or ducks. Before asking questions like this, think, read, learn and do a search to see if this question has been asked before.
  • Some still haven't evolved into real humans yet either.
  • I do..do you?
  • No I do not.I believed God created us as humans not as apes.
  • The theory is not that humans evolved from apes, but rather from a common ancestor that humans and apes shared. Come on people lets get it right. =]
  • No, but apes and humans had common ancestors.
  • No! Do you??!! Proof: EVOLUTION?? I guess that for myself, I do not just Believe it NOT to be true, I have literally PROVEN that it is NOT - Scientifically! There are 2 "animals" that specifically and comprehensively disprove evolutionary theory beyond all doubt: Snake & Man. WHY THEM?? … and … HOW?? you may ask. They are Precise opposites in everything - both behaviourally and anatomically!! As a Specialist Anatomist and Kinesiologist, I undertook a comparative study over nearly 10 years, discovering, then proving, this great, yet simple, phenomenon ‘WHY DO YOU SAY THEY ARE OPPOSITE??’ you may ask. You may also query, "Well, if they are precise opposites, Why do they both have backbones and breathe air, and have many other apparently similar internal organs?” In answering this, it needs to be both - recognized and acknowledged that "kinds" of organism [or species] cannot simply defy the Higher overall laws of nature itself, simply to accent a differentiation of species. That is the number 1 rule of comparative science. What I am saying here is that because of their size, and land-dwelling nature, etc., they are necessarily Both vertebrate, and require some similarity in alimentary system, etc., simply to live efficiently and to satisfy the requirements of effective survival according to their overall land-dwelling nature. (Most specifically, I speak particularly of venomous ground snakes in this study.) There, after satisfying the fundamental laws of survival nature and of effective and satisfactory existence itself, their 'similarities' completely end! Thereafter, they are total opposites in everything – in terms of all possible differentiating factors among the beasts that exist. In fact, a very close examination will reveal that snakes cannot be more unlike other beasts, either, if they tried! For that matter, neither could Man be more different than everything else!! ... and that is, despite all the claims of genetics, etc., that various species [of ape, etc.] possess 99% similarity with the DNA of Man. Despite all this supposed similarity, there is nothing that really well compares to Man at all among the beasts that exist - especially, behaviourally. Now this extraordinary discovery of total opposites tends to disprove random chance mutation – per evolutionary theory. It also confirms a deliberation in Creation – it tends to most powerfully support that there is a God in nature – determining the nature of matters and designing them, according to His own purposes. Similarly, it also powerfully supports the Biblical account of Adam and Eve, wherein it was the very serpent, itself, in fact, which was used by Satan to oppose God to Eve. As you may recall, as a result of this act by the serpent, God cursed all things – changing them – but none so greatly as the snake!! [See Holy Bible] Obviously, as this study shows, among all the changes that were made was the symbolic representation re the snake that epitomized this very act – its Opposition to Man and God!! … especially so, when we consider, as well, that that same record declares that Man was created in the express image of God. This acknowledgment makes the whole proposal of expressed symbolic opposition between Man and snake all the more significant, given the Biblical history. A Master Achievement re early Biblical Proofs … would you not think?? God, only, can be thanked for it, under His direction, guidance and revelation! ALL His acts and inspiration are Masterly – hence, His name: “The Master”. OBJECTION BY ANOTHER ANSWERER RE MY DISCOVERY: You don't appear to understand the math involved in evolution or genetics. We may have 99% similar DNA to a Chimpanzee, but we also have 80% similar DNA to a banana. MY RESPONSE: denidowi May, 11 2008 at 05:10 AM [Edit] Well, really, I DO believe I understand the maths in genetics! As a mathematician myself, what you're saying is precisely what I am saying. The whole concept of opposites is purely mathematical. The claims by geneticists that we all (Man and Beast, more particularly) spring from the same evolutionary derivatives/tree/chain simply because our DNA's are so alike - especially, chimps and humans being so close is my particular point - is precisely why I say that that % DNA similarity does not make us similar or of the same background – especially when you consider the considerably close % of the banana – at 80% sameness. Despite the DNA similarity, the point is that this DNA similarity has to actually evidence properly in nature – Both, behaviourally and anatomically. Bananas?? I don’t think so! The similarity re DNA merely proves that ALL life has to have certain characteristics and similarity of feature simply in order to simply satisfactorily survive alive in nature – so that it exists efficiently. After all, God is a God of law and order. Snakes and Man, therefore, share DNA similarities, so does the banana, but only so far as to make them live effectively in nature. There, the similarity totally ends! Specie-wise, Man and snake are precise Opposites – even among their similar survival features – lung/s, heart, mouth, alimentary canal, etc. – there is great opposition between the two. LET’S JUST SIT BACK AND ENJOY A BRIEF LIST RE OPPOSITION BETWEEN MAN AND SNAKE FROM THE BOOK, “TWO BIRDS … ONE STONE!!” (Denis Towers) SNAKES VS MAN: Horizontal flat ambulation vs upright, vertical. Lies flat along the ground vs. stands erect Indented penis (lies pushed into the inside of the body when ‘flaccid’) vs external in Man Forked divergent tongue vs convergent [narrowing] While on the tongue: no apparent taste buds vs Yes…. Tongue: Much external time vs mostly within mouth Flattened head vs domed high skull No appendages vs greatest appendicular/axial skeletal ratio of all vertebrates In rest: human - supine, straight, or zig-zagged position vs coiled, etc In movement: snake – zig-zagged, random vs direct, deliberate Ears? Has none vs … External nose? Has none vs … Vocalization? Has none – is a ‘hiss & a byword’ vs… Eyes? Venomous groundsnakes: mainly monocular vs binocular Food & living practices? Nocturnal vs diurnal Hibernates & seasonal vs all year around performer… Dormant hidden lifestyle vs active [!], healthy[!] open Almost still sex copulation for hours vs acceleratory [in health & vitality] Eyes covered-hidden by own skin [that is, internal, weak] vs momentary eyelid, direct contact with external… Audio: internal & almost non-existent vs eternal entry – prime means of communication Smell: internal, powerful vs external [weak, by comparison with beasts, generally] Touch: thick scaly skin - insensitive vs great sensitivity… TASTE?? Apparently, non-existent vs opposite… Multi-coloured vs…uniformity Also tremendous variation in size [6” – 30’] vs…comparative uniformity [in health] Copulating penis? Hooked & downward pointing vs. upward & erect, etc. Only erectile structure/s [fangs] initiate death vs only erectile structure in Man initiates life 2 peni vs singular penis Mainly [deadly groundsnakes, that is] oviparous vs viviparous birth to young Consumption? All in 1 great gulp vs boundless chewing & into small pieces Head 1st consumption of victim vs. rarely eat heads Retractible, curved, sharp teeth, pulling long-ways vs fixed, non-curved, mostly molar teeth, which effect direct up & down crushing effect on food Food totally meat – eaten alive vs mainly ‘picked’ and cleaned fruit & veges, etc. meat is killed, prepared and cooked. (Note that even among other carnivorous beasts, most include some vegetation) And the hits just keep on coming between the opposition of Man & snake!! VESTIGIAL APPARATI: Some snakes have miniscule, Internal, unobservable pelvises. In typical opposition, a man’s (woman’s in particular) is more outwardly obvious, and forms part of the system of the leg. In similar opposite manner, snakes possess outwardly-displayed, tails; Man’s is vestigially ‘buried’ in nature: I almost quite forgot, MvL, thanks for your inadvertent extra point for my cause (He was actually trying to introduce a point for the opposition camp), concerning snakes being opposite Man: re the “Vestigial structures” you point out; I hadn’t thought of it previously. So, Very good ... very good for my cause: Yes; I must admit, I originally pointed out in my ‘work’ that in Opposition to snakes, humans have no tail - and certainly, in outwardly visual terms, this is so. However, I'm glad you highlighted these structures vestigially. You'll note, accordingly [that is, in terms of ‘Opposition between Man and snake’], that the vestigial structures of the snake - its pelvic - lie laterally across its body, whereas, in complete opposition, Man's – his vestigial tail bone – lies vertically, along his longitudinal plane. So, Good point, MvL ... Good inadvertent point for my cause! Further [Behavioural consideration re your observation now]: Man's vestigial apparatus here, assists his "REST" Mode in life – that is, sitting. Snake, in the true Opposition that he seems to epitomize across every feature, uses his vestigial apparati for active purposes – balance in movement and assistance in the sexual act. As most simply curl or coil up in rest, his miniscule pelvis is obviously, not needed for his rest periods! SO ONCE AGAIN, IN DECISIVE MANNER, THE SNAKE HAS PROVEN HIMSELF QUITE OPPOSITE MAN IN ALL THINGS! Good ol’ MvL, God bless him, then proposed that he could also prove that pigeons or dogs were also ‘opposite humans’. I responded in the following manner: You are right, MvL. One thing I learned from all my 9 year research into this matter is that animals are quite unlike humans - if not, opposite humans in so many aspects themselves! In like manner (re my hypothesis), however, snakes appear to be even more unlike anything else that exists on earth than even humans do!! ... including their [supposed] ‘nearest cousins’ (lizards), if you really study them very closely, that is. They are at considerable variation with one another. Whereas, if you made a comparative study of the oppositeness of feature between [say] a cow and a bird, or a snail and a dog, you would not access nearly as many opposites by comparison. Perhaps, somewhat surprising, but true nonetheless! For further clarification, you might try the Book, mentioned above. JUST A SPAT RE A FEW MORE OPPOSITES BETWEEN MAN AND SNAKE: Ratio of Brain size to mouth: extremely low – only a fraction vs. most pronounced of all known creatures [a case of mind over matter, I believe] Sheds its ‘skin’ in 1 whole piece vs. in opposition, not so Snake sleeps with open eyes vs. shut-eye Arrangement of internal organs: Mostly in single file vs. paired Accordingly, lives mostly alone vs. in pairs/families Desserts its young even before birth [eggs] vs. constant nurture and parental nourishment Cold-blooded vs. warm… Head in dirt vs. head nearest the heavens, etc. Here, you have but a mini-list of the all-encompassing complete opposition: Man vs. snake! May God Bless You PLEASE DISSEMINATE THIS SIMPLE YET ASTOUNDING DISCOVERY WORLDWIDE!
  • Yes we evolved from apes. To all those saying we share a common ancestor, what do you think that common ancestor was? It was an ape! It might not have been any species of ape currently living, but it was still an ape.
  • Yes I do.
  • Checkmate
  • We did not evolved from apes - we are apes. We and all the other apes evolved from a common ape-like ancestor about 10 million years ago. If you want to define agroup which includes both gorillas and chimpanzees, that group also contains humans, since the human/chimp split cam after the gorilla/human-and-chimp split.
  • No, both of them were created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster :)
  • Modern Humans and Modern Apes didn't exist 5 mil years ago. There did exist a species you want to call Ape and I don't want to call Ape. For the sake of clarity, can we agree then, to say Modern Apes (alive today) and Ancient Apes?
  • "Over the years I have met many outstanding scientists who were also strong believers in Christ."~Billy Graham; in ministry for 70 years. "Some of the most devout men and women I have ever known were also scientists or engineers. To them, there was no conflict between their faith and their reason—in fact, some told me they went hand in hand...They also had discovered that faith in God is logical. They came to see, for example, that it's much more logical to believe God created this complex universe than to believe it all happened by chance." ~Billy Graham "Over the years, I've met many leading scientists and other intellectuals who not only believed in God, but told me they had concluded it was far more logical to believe in God than to disbelieve in Him. Why did they come to this conclusion? One reason, I discovered, was because they had an open mind, and were willing to examine the evidence for God and weigh it carefully and honestly." Billy Graham I believe that God created us. I believe he created us to have a relationship with Him so we could enjoy His love. I believe He made us because of his love and in order to express his love to us. I believe, as Billy Graham said, we were "put here to live for him and experience the joy of his presence." I believe we were created for intimacy with God. I love this quote from The Sacred Romance by Brent Curtis and John Eldredge: "What He is after is *you*--your laughter, your tears, your dreams, your fears, your heart of hearts. He wants *you*. And he has moved heaven and earth to get you." I believe we were made because of God's love and we were made for God, for his purpose. And I believe that "[our] life's purpose fits into a much larger purpose He has designed for eternity." ~Rick Warren. "God put [us] here for a reason, and life's greatest joy comes from knowing His plan for our lives" said Billy Graham. I believe we were also made for God and his purpose. As Rick Warren describes in the chapters of his book The Purpose Driven Life: were planned for God's pleasure, formed for God's family, created to become like Christ, shaped for serving God, and we were made for a mission. And I believe we were meant to be with him forever. “For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life."~John 3:16 Here are some resources that might be helpful to you.... --Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe, biochemist, senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University: Was Darwin Wrong? "Mike Behe...makes an overwhelming case against Darwin on the biochemical level. No one has done this before. It is an argument of great originality, elegance, and intellectual power. For readers who have been persuaded that biologists have long since demonstrated the validity of Darwinian theory, [Behe's] observations are apt to be a source of astonishment."~David Berlinski, author of A Tour of the Calculus One thing he shows is "the incredible complexity of each cell and the systems that require many complex parts to work. If you're missing one part, you don't get an almost-perfect system; you get no system at all. Any creative process would have to produce everything all at once. The Darwinian says that you produce one thing that has some function, and then you add on another one and another and so on until you get the complete cell. Each step is supposedly superior to the last. But irreducible complexity makes that impossible."~Phillip Johnson --Unlocking The Mystery Of Life, by Illustra Media, link to watch whole thing: http://loveisjoy.webs.com/evolution.htm (webpage also has 38 evidences against evolution) Summary "In 1993, Professor Phillip Johnson of the University of California at Berkeley [retired UC Berkeley American law professor and author, professor of law at Boalt School of Law, author of "Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds," "Darwin on Trial," "Reason in the Balance"; see interview w/ him, in "Conversation With Phillip E. Johnson: Dismantling Darwinism":http://www.billygraham.org/DMag_Article.... ] invited a small group of scientists and philosophers to a small beach town on the Central Coast of California. They came from major academic centers--including Cambridge, Munich, and the University of Chicago--to question an idea that had dominated science for 150 years. 'I think Pajaro Dunes represented a turning point for many of us. Individually we all had questions about evolutionary theory, but when we came together each person brought something of their own to the table and suddenly we all had a glimpse of a new way of looking at life that none of us had individually seen before.' ~Dr. Paul A. Nelson, PhD in philosophy, fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture 'I would have to say that this was an intense period of time in my life. It just seemed that there was something here much more intellectually satisfying than the view that I had held up until this time.'~Dr. Dean Kenyon, leading evolutionist, BSc in physics, Ph.D. in biophysics from Stanford University, previous National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow in Chemical Biodynamics at the UC Berkeley, Research Associate at Ames Research Center, Assistant Professor at San Francisco State University until 1969. 'Looking it back on it now I think that gave me the motivation to just look the evidence and see where it pointed.' ~Dr. Michael J. Behe 'I realize that this was bigger than any one person or discipline. This was the beginning of a community of scientists who are now willing to face the fundamental mystery of life's origin.'~Dr. Stephan C. Meyer director and Senior Fellow of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute --The Priviliged Planet, by Illustra Media (goes hand in hand with Unlocking The Mysteries of Life), for an introduction: http://manawatu.christian-apologetics.org/review-of-the-privileged-planet-the-search-for-purpose-in-the-universe-dvd/ --Cosmic Coincidences by John Gribben and Martin Rees --The Fingerprints of God~Dr, Hugh Ross, astronomer, a BSc in physics from the University of British Columbia and an MSc and PhD in astronomy from the University of Toronto, a postdoctoral research fellow at Caltech, studying quasars and galaxies, the youngest person ever to serve as director of observations for Vancouver's Royal Astronomical Society; He "tells the fascinating story of how the latest research into origins not only has sealed the case for divine creation, but has revealed the identity of the Creator Himself." --http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/booklist.shtml "NOTE: All these books give evidences for the God of the Bible, but many are written by non-Christians, some by non-theists and even evolutionists." Topics include astronomical design, origin of life, origin of humanity, evolution and the fossil record, human consciousness, and the origin and reliability of the Bible... --http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dcp466nb_27kpdnngg8&hl=en: Does God exist? Did Jesus exist? Is Christianity credible? Is there an intellectual basis for faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God? Did Jesus die/raise from the dead? Is the bible historically reliable? Is the Bible from God? Was Darwin wrong? What did leading scientists--and evolutionist--conclude about evolutionary theory when questioning it and seeing where the evidence of life's origin led?
  • I know so!! But just an fyi: we didn't evolve from the apes that still exist today...we AND apes both evolved from a common ancestor who no longer exists! :-)
  • I am amazed that anybody could possibly believe we did not.
  • No, from some tpye of ancient bacteria.
  • After seeing your avatar, Zack, how could I possibly believe we came from apes???!!!
  • You asked me this once before ... and I'm going to give you the same answer: How could you possibly ask such a Q whan you view this avatar??!!
  • I believe we evolved from something Ape like. But not from Apes.
  • Are there any other facts that people would prefer not to believe?
  • No way.If that's true,why are apes still apes?
  • I was taught human evolved over a period of millions of year. Our earlier ancestors were humanoids, not exactly apes.
  • Absolutely! And here's the proof (please, please, please, apes all over the jungle, forgive me for this transgression and insult to your primate intelligence, please...): . . . . .
  • Informed professional biologists, of which I am one, who have taken the trouble to study the evidence with open minds conclude that the great apes and human beings evolved from a common ancestor species. For further discussion of this matter visit http://www.talkorigins.org/ and almost all of your questions about evolution will be answered.
  • Nope. Otherwise there would no longer be apes around.
  • No, but I believe that humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor.
  • Since apes and other animals can just be while we need to do a lot of disgusting things we don't like doing just to have that happiness feeling for a second or two every once in a while, I'd say we involved from apes. Yes.
  • If evolution is real, why aren't we still evolving?
  • No, both apes and humans evolved from an earlier ancestor.
  • Only uneducated people actually believe that.
  • Certainly not with Chloe looking at me like that!

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy