That's a good answer, but why was our ape-line more fitted to evolve into humans than the apes living under the same conditions? I'd buy into a random mutation better than evolution of the fitted, because that means physical changes due to better adaptation to the environment. Instead we have a different set of genes.
There's a lot to be said for evolution but most arguments for it can't quite make me get over the hump of scepticism.
Actually, I think the universe was started by my Uncle Roy, the clockmaker, in a previous billion year-old incarnaion. Beyond that I'm not prepared to go.
> but why was our ape-line more fitted to evolve into humans than the apes living under the same conditions?
What an odd question. It's like asking when when your ancestors moved from Scotland (or wherever) to the US, why didn't the other Scots become Americans as well?
Just as people drift apart and do/become differnt things, so do species.