You are again demonstrating your total lack of understanding of the Theory of Evolution. It does
not reqauire or even predict that apes breed human beings.
Let's do a thought experiment. Assume all your maternal anscetors are alive. Take a chimp from the zoo and do the same.
You take your mother's right hand; the chimp takes takes her mother's left. Repeat with grandparents and so on. On your side, eventually you will see other species of homo; then australopithecus, and eventually, you will end up with one individual who holds your line in the right, and the chimp line in the left hand. At this point, and for a distance above,
there will be little or no difference between the human and chimp lines. These will accumulate gradually.
I repeat the key point:
At any point in either chain neigbouring individuals will be little different, but changes will be seen moving up or down the chain.
Insofar as I understand your point, you seem to be arguing that teh TOE calls for saltation (the "hopeful monster"). It does not. It is the accumulation of many tiny changes over many generations.
The conventional wisdom at present is that the hominid line evolved as a savannah animal as a response to forests shrinking, while the chimp line retreated further into the remaining forests, and it was the gradual accumulation of changes to cope with this altered life-style that eventually led to us. However, the details are not important: what is important is that there is
geographic separation, to prevent breeding back to the norm.
Sorry, but you're talking about human manipulation of genes. You forget that humans weren't around before primates created them to manipulate genes. So again, how did apes breed human beings (or primates who haven't been found yet)? And why isn't anything resembling a primate today prdoucing offspring that have turned into humans since the beginning of recorded history?
Also, if this was done strictly through mutation, then why the need for a common ancestor? Thank you.
For Whigs admit no force but argument.