[Physicist]

The first mistake is that evolution does not teach that humans descended from monkeys; it states that both have a common ancestor.

I personally don't consider this to be a mistake (although you are correct in stating that there is a point there that Ferndina does not understand). It is true that modern monkeys and humans descend from a common ancestor, but I'm fairly sure that our last common ancestor, if it could be examined by people today, would also be classified as a monkey (and our last common ancestor with apes, an ape). I thus have no difficulty in stating that humans descended from monkeys and apes.

[Gumlegs]

I don't disagree. It's the misconception that the presence of a "more evolved" species requires the extinction of the "less evolved" species that I was attempting to address. You'll notice G3K has posted a similar misunderstanding in his post 77 to this thread:

A question which I never hear evolutionists answer is why if evolution goes on all the time, if evolution occurs because species must adapt to survive, why are amoebas, such simple creatures, still around after some billion years? Why if evolution goes on all the time, these creatures remain simple and unchanged?

77 posted on 6/17/02 9:27 AM Eastern by gore3000