What is your definition of a "lower species?" The term does not come up in scientific literature. All species either adapt to their environment or they die. Humans adapted to their environment, supplanting other hominid species, including their progenitor species. There is no "lower" or "higher" species because there is not scientific manner to determine whether a species is lower or higher than any other. Species either adapt and survive or they don't. That, in a nutshell, is the sum total of Evolutionary theory. There is no overarching philosophy, no rules for living one's life, nothing metaphysical at all. It is simply a description of a process, nothing more nor less. Your constant forays into the metaphysical indicate a clear misunderstanding of science in general and evolution in particular.
Perhaps not in scientific literature, but it does in non-scientific evolutionary literature such as the drivel written by Darwin. He was quite a racist and considered blacks to be lower species due to the totally unscientific garbage called the brachyocephallic (sp?)index.
Anyways, you are just playing dumb. I told you what I meant. Did man not evolve from a single celled bacteria? If that is the case then you needed lots of new characteristics, lots of new additions to the genome, lots of macro-evolution to get from there to here.