|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Why are there no human apes alive today? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2323 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
traste writes:
...
Well I think you justdont get it. My point is since apemen is more advance than modern apes,orangutans, and many other types of monkeys,then (Why is it there is no other ape men living today?)
Because those apes were adapted to their (ever changing) environment, yet those apemen weren't. It's really that simple. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
My point is since apemen is more advance than modern apes,orangutans, and many other types of monkeys,then (Why is it there is no other ape men living today?) Who said anything about monkeys? Monkeys aren't apes. Apemen are no more advanced that other apes, just different. For the same reason that their are only 2 species of Chimpanzee & one species of Gorilla adaptation. Those species that could adapt, survived, those that couldn't became extinct. There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2725 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Traste.
traste writes: My point is since apemen is more advance than modern apes,orangutans, and many other types of monkeys,then (Why is it there is no other ape men living today?) Would you also argue that humans are more advanced than, say, moths? Or, are they more advanced than jellyfish? Flies? Slugs? How come these things survived when "more advanced" things died? The existence of "more advanced" species does not mean "less advanced" species have to go extinct to make room. Every species adapts to a particular environment. Then, the fate of the species is tied to that particular environment. If that environment changes, the species must adapt to it; if it cannot, it will go extinct. The environment to which chimpanzees adapted was different from the environment to which Neanderthals adapted. The Neanderthal environment changed such that they could no longer survive. But, the chimpanzee environment remained similar enough that the chimps could survive in it. And the story is the same for every species: change happens, and some species are affected more than others. It has nothing to do with who is "more advanced" (whatever that means, anyway). -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Databed Junior Member (Idle past 5330 days) Posts: 7 From: Chattanooga, TN, USA Joined: |
Why haven't humans lived in the jungles where gorillas live? The answer is probably very similar to the answer for, "Why aren't Neanderthals there wiping out gorillas?"
Neanderthal did not evolve to live in jungles, they evolved to live in the exact same niche as modern humans. Since modern man was better at it, we wiped them out. Simple as that. Hominids weren't good at living in the niche that apes lived in. True, today we can live anywhere due to our technology, but do you think a family of man could survive in the jungles along side apes without any modern conveniences like guns or weapons and modern tools? I don't think so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
greyseal Member (Idle past 3889 days) Posts: 464 Joined: |
Why haven't humans lived in the jungles where gorillas live? They do! That's why gorilla's are an endangered species... But I see what you mean
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1052 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
Neanderthals didn't evolve to live in the same niche as modern humans. Neanderthals were adapted to live in chilly, ice-age Europe while modern humans were busy evolving on Africa's savannahs. They were shorter and stockier, helping in heat retention; they were much more robust to enable them to get by in harsh environmental conditions, and they were less equipped for long treks across open country. Modern humans managed to solve the problems of northern living with more advanced technology than the Neanderthals.
As for whether humans can survive in jungles without modern technology, indeed they can and do. The few people still living with no contact with modern civillisation can be found mostly in places like the Amazon and the jungles of New Guinea.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Databed Junior Member (Idle past 5330 days) Posts: 7 From: Chattanooga, TN, USA Joined: |
Well, my point is that the niches of neanderthals and humans overlapped which probably led to the extinction of the species. The fact that gorillas and apes still have habitat that is undisturbed by humans is why they are still around. Their niches simply don't overlap or at least they have stabilized in a way where they don't overlap.
Humans,historically have not lived in the places where gorillas currently live. If they did, the gorillas would not be around. I'm in no way saying that gorillas have not been displaced and are not endangered by human deforestation and habitation today.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Why haven't humans lived in the jungles where gorillas live? They do. Who else do you think is poaching them?
Hominids weren't good at living in the niche that apes lived in. True, today we can live anywhere due to our technology, but do you think a family of man could survive in the jungles along side apes without any modern conveniences like guns or weapons and modern tools? I don't think so. Well, there are cases of ferrel children being born in the wild and raised by wolves, so it is conceivable that they could survive. But where are you going with this? "Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind." -- Bertrand Russell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Databed Junior Member (Idle past 5330 days) Posts: 7 From: Chattanooga, TN, USA Joined: |
By living where gorillas live I obviously mean competing in the same niche and location. No one lives with gorillas in this sense. Poachers definitely don't fit this description and even in the literal sense, which is how I guess my statement was taken, they still don't live there.
Also, I guess I should have made it clearer that I am speaking in an evolutionary sense for humans, which includes the last 2 million years or so. In this sense, I wasn't really thinking of men with guns and trucks. My point was that humans were never competing for any niches that apes occupy. They weren't fit for those niches regardless of competition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22500 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Databed writes: By living where gorillas live I obviously mean competing in the same niche and location. Same niche, sure. Same location, of course not. Gorillas wouldn't set up shop in a human village, and humans wouldn't build a village in the midst of a gorilla group. But fairly nearby one another? Why not?
Also, I guess I should have made it clearer that I am speaking in an evolutionary sense for humans, which includes the last 2 million years or so...My point was that humans were never competing for any niches that apes occupy. They weren't fit for those niches regardless of competition. You've lost me, and probably just about everyone else, too. Do you really believe that during the past 2 million years in Africa that humans and human evolutionary ancestors did not live in the same jungles as gorillas, probably right up to the 20th century and somewhat beyond? And that there are no primitive tribes still living in jungle niches? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
My point was that humans were never competing for any niches that apes occupy. They weren't fit for those niches regardless of competition. I don't see where you are going with this, though? Are you using this an explanation for why and how neandethal's were competed out of existence versus gorilla's? What is the greater point you are trying to make, in other words? "Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind." -- Bertrand Russell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Databed Junior Member (Idle past 5330 days) Posts: 7 From: Chattanooga, TN, USA Joined: |
There are thousands of different jungle niches. You seem to be confusing jungle niche with jungle habitat. Take a look at the typical diet of a mountain gorilla (this is part of its niche, food, in case you didn't know), an ape that lives on the ground just as hominids. This is no where close to what our diet can consist of. We can't digest leaves and stems which is about 85% of their diet and they have to eat a lot of it. Further, there isn't much other food available in these locations.
The whole point I was trying to make is that hominids are not fit to live in niches that apes occupy and that's why we don't find them there. Modern human consumed every niche that a hominid can occupy and therefore all other hominids were wiped out and many apes were not. This is not complicated. BTW, sorry if I strayed from my original point, I was having to defend against people nitpicking my original post. Edited by Databed, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
Huntard wrote:
Because those apes were adapted to their (ever changing) environment, yet those apemen weren't. It's really that simple What made them better adapted? If they are better adapted then it follows that they have advanced feutures. In this respect my argument remained intact and my question remained unanswered.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
traste Member (Idle past 5170 days) Posts: 173 Joined: |
bluescat48 wrote:
Who said anything about monkeys? Monkeys aren't apes. Apemen are no more advanced that other apes, just different. For the same reason that their are only 2 species of Chimpanzee & one species of Gorilla adaptation. Those species that could adapt, survived, those that couldn't became extinct. Actually they are advanced because the theory of evolution itself claimed as complexities increased they became more advanced than there predessors, in this regards the question is sensible. Because if they are not advanced. Why they survived? The theory of evolution claimed that natural selection choose only those organism that are better adapted, it cannot be called better adapted if it is not advanced.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4217 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
Why they survived? The point is they didn't survive. The other apes & Homo sapiens survived but the so called apemen didn't.
Me writes: If, according to your statement, the apemen should have survived since they were "More advanced." Apemen are no more advanced that other apes, just different. There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024