Here's my one big problem with evolution in terms of ape-man. It sounds elementary, but if humans evolved from apes, why are their humans AND apes.
I cannot either, believe that some big bang is the cause of al l the complexities of life.
Someone owes me a nickel. My, this is a big pile of nickels I've got here.
First of all, humans are apes.
But as to your question, humans and other apes evolved from a common ancestor. That common ancestor no longer exists. Hope that clears it up.
Because they evolved in two separate populations in two different directions. Why is this hard for you to grasp?
I cannot either, believe that some big bang is the cause of al l the complexities of life.
How does a theory about the creation of galaxies and stars relate to the complexities of life?
Are you sure you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night?
OK. You've done your "study" of ID by watching a video, now it's time to give equal study time to evolution.
For starters, check out the notion of common descent. It might answer your question about the existence of both apes and humans.
As someone else has posted, we both came from a common ancestor. It just looked, to us, like an ape. An ape would probably think it looked like, well, a little hairy human.
As for the "Big bang", who says that this isn't the part that was willed into existence, and everything else fell, eventually, into place..
If Americans descended from Englishmen, why are there still Englishmen? That sounds flippant, but think hard about it: it is really the same question on a much smaller timescale.
I will answer you. There is such meager understanding of evolution out there, even sometimes among those who think they know.
Imagine a huge area, like Africa, that is a vast jungle. There are millions, maybe billions, of rudimentary apes living across the continent. They are all of the same family and basically the same.
In geologic time, a short period of a few thousand years, a mountain range begins to rise. Trapped on one side are one group, on the other a different group.
The first group is fortunate, they are on the wet side and trees, forest, fruits and vegetables abound. On the other the mountains drive the moisture out of the clouds and the land becomes a serengeti, a dry plain with few fruits and vegetables, lots of grass, grains and grazing animals for food. Only problem is, you have to walk a lot.
Those with feet that had the same toes like thumbs couldn't walk very well to chase the animals and forage for tubers and such. Not like the lucky ones that were stuck in the rain forest on the other side of the mountain range that could still live in trees and climb for fruit. Flatter feet enhanced survival value.
Not only did living on the dry plains require increased locomotion the scarcity of food meant that you had to learn to hunt. This means you had to increase your intelligent in order to out-think your prey. So larger brains had greater survival potential and you became smarter. Not only that, it took increased group cooperation to track and run down prey so your communication skills evolved as well. The better the communication the more food, the more survival.
True, lions, hyenas and other carnivores didn't develop such elaborate communications systems but they didn't need to. They weren't skinny little weak hominids that needed to outsmart their prey rather than run it down and kill it.
Meanwhile, those lazy, lucky apes - gorillas and chimps - still lived in that plush forest and had little reason to evolve much. Oh, a change in food source here, competing with baboons there, but little real reason to change.
There are many, many examples of ancestoral species that remain unchanged today although their many descendents, trapped in different environs were forced to mutate and no longer remotely resemble these ancestors. Do a search on the tetrapod taxion someday, one of the oldest things on the planet. The number of species that splinter off from this is astounding. Yet, many exist unchanged today, but their decendents exist as well. It is all a matter of niche.
And those that are trapped in niches that change too fast for them to evolve to adapt just die off. This is the answer to post 206 by Claptrap.
Given natural selections rule shouldn't we see more adaptation in primate species instead we see primates unable to adapt to enviromental degradation, gorillas being the prime example.
This is what happened to Wholly Mammoths, Saber Tooth Tigers and any number of extinct species. That is why they are extinct. The world changed too fast.
Proof of evolution.