NewTime wrote:
Yigeren wrote:
I'm sorry, but this question makes no sense to me. What is the reasoning behind the question?
I could give a big long explanation of anthropology, but I think it's probably just better to understand why you think humans logically should not still be in Africa.
The question is basically pointing out the flaw in people saying that we shouldn't still have apes and monkeys if humans came from them.
It's a straw man argument. We didn't evolve from any
modern ape or monkey species. Modern apes, monkeys, and humans evolved from a common primate ancestor. There's still a lot of quibbling about what exactly that ancestor looked like, but most have settled on something chimp-like with human-like features.
Imagine this as a metaphor. Your Mom and Dad lived in South Africa. They had 10 kids. One moves to Egypt, one to the Ivory Coast, and three move to Israel. Five stayed at home with the folks in South Africa. The fact that some of the kids moved away doesn't erase the fact that your parents and the other kids stayed back home. It also says that the kids are not the same thing as their parents. Each kid has descendants. Some of them move to new locations: Asia, Australia, Europe, even the Americas. The African kids also have descendants, who stay put or move to various parts of Africa. Some may decide to move out of Africa in later generations as well.
_________________
Diagnosed Bipolar II in 2012, Autism spectrum disorder (moderate) & ADHD in 2015.