Fwiw, so far as I understand it... through the mid-20th century people had this simplistic view of human evolution, in which there was one line of evolution that began with a primitive ape and eventually led to humans. What got them thinking in another direction is that they started to find bones from very different animals (some closer to human, some much further away) in the same strata and dated to the same time period. Once they realized that these animals coexisted they started to think that things were more like a tree or bush, than a single evolutionary path, not just for animals in general but even for the more recent human predecessors. As further evidence came in this tree/bush idea was proven to be correct. It didn't have anything to do with creationists asking things like "if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys?" Though such questions were what I was poking fun at in my soup statement of course.