cavemen on earth

[phatneck21br]

how did cavemen get on earth

[MargeB]

Are you talking about all cavemen or just Captain Caveman?

They evolved from a mammal line that came down through monkeys, to apes, and the hominid line branched off from the main one about the same time as chimpanzees branched off. The big line was monkeys....branch...primates line (branch 1: Orang Utan) (branch2 gorilla) branch 3 etc)

[Escher]

I suspect they dug their way out.

[kempie]

MargeB - humans and apes aren't descended from monkeys. Rather all three are branches of the Primate line.

[jupiter 9]

A Spaceship!!

[MargeB]

Look at the ancestor of apes (including humans) and monkeys. I think you'll find that those are monkeys. It's a common mistake.

[kempie]

Yes MargeB you have made a common mistake. Our  ancestors, from which Prosimians (Lemurs), Simians (Monkeys) and Hominoids (Apes and Humans) evolved actually looked more like shrews.

[MargeB]

Kempie, you're wrong:

http://www.siu.edu/news/monkey_skull.html

[kempie]

MargeB - this from the text you cite:

 "It represents an animal that lies somewhere on the evolutionary tree between modern monkeys and the ancestor that gave rise to all monkeys, apes and humans".

Nowhere does it say we evolved from monkeys.

A creature that lived 5 million years ago cannot be called a monkey because monkeys did not exist at that time.

Just because something may look like something else doesn't automatically make them the same thing.

A dolphin may share features with a shark but that doesn't make it a fish.

[MargeB]

I quote from the same text:

"But this ancient skull has a low braincase, long face and big teeth.  It ate fruit, not leaves.  And while clearly a monkey, its forehead, cheeks and eyesockets make it look more like smaller version of an orangutan."

[kempie]

Nowhere in the text do they make the claim that this was our ancestor. In fact this is the last paragraph:

"What we're interested in now is 'Kenyapithecus,' an ape that existed at the same time.  Every new fossil there is telling us something new.  We think that it will be at least as significant as 'Victoriapithecus'-and perhaps even more so-because it actually may be an ancestor to the great apes and humans."

[snoteater]

Kempie is correct - read Richard Dawkin's The Ancestors Tale for more info.

[snoteater]

Man did not evolve from monkeys or apes - we have a common ancestor. We branched off at various points.

[MargeB]

snoteater...the subject of debate on this thread is the common ancestor of "apes" (as classically conceived), humans, and present day monkeys...which is, I contend, a monkey, even if it no longer exists among other monkeys.

Man's immediate ancestor, which he shares with chimpanzees, but not gorillas, orang utans, or monkeys, was in fact an ape. Non?

[snoteater]

Non.

[snoteater]

And from the article you referenced:

"It represents an animal that lies somewhere on the evolutionary tree between modern monkeys and the ancestor that gave rise to all monkeys, apes and humans," Benefit said.

So we have a common ancestor that gave rise to the various species but was not one of them. Non?

[snoteater]

Aplogies to kempie - didn't realise the quote had already been used.

Man is an ape MadgeB.

[tml]

they didn't!

[mongos bird]

Some of them still drag their knuckles on the floor and communicate in grunts!!

[MargeB]

I know man is an ape, that's why I said "as classically conceived". The common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees was an ape. If you wish  to dispute this please show me your evidence. If you like, I can show you mine. Cheers.