What is the “Common Ancestor” the evolutionist refer to?

Question

I have read many statements saying the Human did not evolve for Apes but yet the two have a “Common Ancestors”. I have not been able to find anything that says What, Who are Where this ancestor is. I did visit a museum that had a replica of what is called “Lucy”. After a discussion with the director that was putting on the display and he explained “Lucy” was a mutation and could possibly be the missing link. The common ancestor had not been defined at that time.

Since it is the belief that there is a common ancestor does anyone know what this common ancestor is.?

Also could you tell me after identifying the common ancestor which human evolved first. Was it the male or female human or did they just both happen at the same time?

Please not bashing of the theory of evolution or attempts to show that it is correct or not. Thank you.

Answer 1

Honestly? Nobody knows at the moment. We can only presume that it was an ape-like species and it may never even be found in fossil form.



Additionally, it is not a "belief", per se, but a proven fact, that we share a genetic history with modern apes. Genetics alone can show that, and it would have to be a pretty big coincidence that we not only appear to have a common ancestry through fossil evidence but also appear to have near exactly the same genetic layout as modern apes. ;)

Answer 2

There are numerous common ancestors. Lucy was an early protohominid, not a common ancestor. There is some evidence to suggest that Lucy is a side branch, not a common ancestor. There was a common ancestor for humans and chimps that is yet to be identified. Pierolapithecus catalaunicus is the likely common ancestor to the great apes. The proto-ape -- the common ancestor to all the apes -- has not been identified. Carpolestes simpsoni, the ancestor of the primates and several other groups has been identified. Paleontology is far from perfect, but the data keeps accruing.



Male and female were simultaneous, probably from the single cell level.

Answer 3

I personally see these arguments are about people who have apparently and allegedly misinterpreted a misrepresentation that is than used as a religious/historical document. A book that can actually be based on natural disasters and natural phenomena and thereby calling it a deities will or judgement. But this changes when it comes to the phenomena of alleged extraterrestrials and UFO sitings and than supposedly throughout our natural history. With that in mind; that with their possible involvement in our own evolution, it can also raise an eyebrow about what or who is a Watcher and a fallen angel/nephilim and what are their so-called works and false miracles. It is my undertsanding that with the right kind of advanced technologies many of these events especially advanced genetics throughout our history can be achieved. An illusion of a deity or false God than could be what we would have refered to as a beast, reptile or dragon. The concept of a plan or program to advance contain and manipulate a planet and its inhabitants such as humans is than within the realm of believeability. I myself have had personal experience with these "people" that have been referred to as the greys and reptillians. Some of their technology also appears to be using artificial life forms or androids. Biblically; Jesus had mentioned the hosts and the great hosts: This appears to be just one of their many abilities by using implants and or clones to control business and politics. You people can argue and insult each other all you want until reality finally slaps you upside your heads. To assume that everything we have learned as Gospel is false than I believe there is still a day coming when the truth or "Revelations" will reveal itself more clearly once and forall. It can still be very possible that both creation and evolution actually go hand in hand.

Answer 4

I dont have an answer Im sorry. I wish someone before me did cause Id like to know too !

I JUST WANTED TO SAY that the people who answered before me some of them are jerks and rude, so those people who say **** like "pee wee herman " and "you cant be that ignorant" get a life, its a ****** question and youre giving a stupid bullshit answer if i should even call it that. You got your dam points for answering a question but you didnt give any helpful info.

Answer 5

The nearest common ancestor of humans and apes was an ape.



The nearest common ancestor of humans, apes, and monkeys was a monkey.



The nearest common ancestor of humans, apes, monkeys, and fish was a fish.

Answer 6

We don't know the exact species, but that doesn't matter. Do you know who your great^10 grandfather was? Does that mean you didn't have one?



We did evolve from a species of ape (as we are apes), but none of the current species.



Species evolve, not individuals.



Please learn a bit more about the theory of evolution before you ask more questions like this. www.talkorigins.org has a lot of information on it.

Answer 7

The Biology section is this way:



http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/;_ylt=AgnvOqwGcTr1CD6BFtsKP174xQt.;_ylv=3?link=list&sid=396545209



If you really want a serious answer to your question, why are you asking it in Religion & Spirtuality?

Answer 8

There is only one "common ancestor" for all of us.



It is called the "Big Bang!"



Perhaps we should call it the "Big Spark!"

Answer 9

Pee Wee Herman

Answer 10

"Was it the male or female human or did they just both happen at the same time?"



You can't possibly be that ignorant.

Answer 11

i dont know...but i dont think it is very important.



its an ape like ancestor.



names of species become quite meaningless when you realise that there is no precise all encompassing definition of species enyway

Answer 12

They say we have a common ancestor of the lowly slug also. LOL!!!!!



Ask them what that is.

Answer 13

a rock

Answer 14

That was grampa bobo.