Possibly even before the clip of Darwin. adult male had already started inquiring himself where he had come from. and somehow the Theory of Divine Creation – that adult male was instead created as himself and has non descended from any other carnal – proved to be instead deficient as a agency to explicate his roots. Scientific surveies subsequently on proved that there are several homologies shared by adult male and apes and the inquiry remains as to whether adult male has so descended from this group of Primatess called apes. However. despite the obvious similarities between the two species. the consequences of this probe say otherwise.
The Proofs against the Supposed Descent of Man from the Apes The Common Ancestor. It is claimed that “ [ worlds ] didn’t evolve from apes… [ but that ] worlds portion a common ascendant with modern African apes. like gorillas and chimpanzees” ( “Where We Came From. ” 2001 ) . The ground therefore for the similarities and the homologous morphological and anatomical features between worlds and apes may non be precisely due to the fact that the first descended from the 2nd but that they could merely be of the same ascendant.
There's a specialist from your university waiting to help you with that essay.
Tell us what you need to have done now!
order now
In a similar manner. when you see similarities between two people of different ages. you can non instantly conclude that the older 1 has begotten the other but that they could be both siblings. In logic. one can state that merely because A looks similar to B. it does non needfully intend that A has descended or originated from B. although we can non deny that so there is some connexion. In short. the claim that worlds descended from apes may merely hold been one guess or premise based on morphological grounds. which may turn out to be weak.
This common ascendant is believed to hold “existed 5 to 8 million old ages ago [ and ] shortly thenceforth. the species diverged into two separate lineages” ( “Where We Came From. ” 2001 ) . There have been claims that “the [ ape or ] gorilla line of descent branched off 1. 6 to 2. 2 million old ages earlier than did the human-chimpanzee divergence” ( Chen & A ; Li. 2001 ) . doing worlds even closer to Pan troglodytess than apes. The term evolutionists have given to this alleged common ascendant of worlds and apes is known as “‘Australopithecus. ’ which means ‘South African ape’” ( Hasnain. 2009 ) .
The theory of the common ascendant has been backed by several surveies which stated that either “mitochondrial DNA” ( Ferris. Wilson & A ; Brown. 1983 ) or the “extremely close immunological resemblance between the serum albumens of apes and adult male. ” ( Sarich & A ; Wilson. 1967 ) The job. nevertheless. is that it could be that this theory is non that plausible after it was found that “the existences called Australopithecus in this fanciful scenario fabricated by evolutionists truly are apes that became extinct” ( Hasnain. 2009 ) .
If the Australopithecus had really non existed. so it could be that adult male has truly descended from apes owing to the homology in their physical constructions. Convergent Development. The homology in the morphology of worlds and apes is. nevertheless. non a strong warrant that the first have descended from the 2nd. It is said that “the resemblance in the skeleton construction of apes and worlds has [ ever served as ] strong grounds for common ancestry” ( “Evolution of Man. ” 2010 ) .
It is nevertheless a hapless premise that similarity means relatedness. which means that “two species can hold homologous anatomy even though they are non related in any way” ( “Evolution of Man. ” 2010 ) . This is known as “convergent development. ” Convergent development teaches one that two species which are clearly unrelated from each other could hold merely hold developed individually and at times coincidently produced similarities in morphology.
In a similar manner. based on pure simple logic. it does non needfully intend that two people are related merely merely because they look similar. even really similar. Menton ( 2002 ) states that these similarities may hold merely been due to “an unbelievable tally of infinite lucky mutational happenstances. ” This merely means that it could hold been that it is a mere happenstance that worlds and apes look likewise. Deductive Logic. Robinson ( 2005 ) argues that “If worlds evolved from apes. so one would anticipate that there would be no apes left on Earth ; all would hold evolved into worlds.
” This statement merely means that since development propels a species to alter. and if it is true that apes have evolved into worlds. so there merely seems no logical account as to why several apes presents have non evolved into worlds. However. this claim could be refuted by the theory that certain species of animate beings may non hold evolved because of their ecological niche. This means that certain apes in the jungle may non hold evolved into worlds due to the fact that the former are arborical. Conclusion Man has non descended from apes.
This is proven by scientifically-based claims that have established the being of a common ascendant. Another cogent evidence is that the development of both worlds and apes was simply convergent. Last. deductive logic disproves it. At this point in clip. scientific researches on the development of adult male and apes have non been able to wholly caducous visible radiation on the possibility or impossibleness of man’s descent from their archpriest brothers. Further research is hence extremely recommended.
Mentions Chen. F. C. & A ; Li. W. H. ( Nov 1985 ) . “Subliminal messages: Between the Satan and the media. ” The American Journal of Human Genetics. 6. 444-456.
Retrieved May 19. 2010. from the Cell database: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. cell. com/AJHG/retrieve/pii/S0002929707640968 “Evolution of Man – What is it? . ” Science. ( 2010 ) . Retrieved May 18. 2010 from the AllAboutScience. org web site: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. allaboutscience. org/evolution-of-man. htm Ferris. S. D. . Wilson. A. C. . & A ; Brown. W. M. ( Apr 1981 ) . “Evolutionary Tree for Apes and Humans based on Cleavage Maps of Mitochondrial DNA. ” Evolution. 78. 2432-2436. Retrieved May 19. 2010. from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America database: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.
pnas. org/content/78/4/2432. full. pdf+html? sid=768efdca-ce15-463a-959d-dd9fbbf7e9d1 Hasnain. “Did Men and Apes Come from a Common Ancestor? . ” Food for Thought: Thought Provoking Articles. ( 26 Jan 2009 ) . Retrieved May 18. 2010 from the Hasnain’s Life web site: hypertext transfer protocol: //hasnain. wordpress. com/2009/01/26/did-men-and-apes-come-from-a-common-ancestor/ Menton. D. N. . Ph. D. “If We Resemble Apes. Does That Mean We Evolved from Apes? . ” Beginning of Man. ( 2002 ) . Retrieved May 18. 2010 from the Missouri Association for Creation web site: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. gennet. org/facts/metro05. hypertext markup language
