Why are there still Chimpanzees?

While I support such answers and I think Dawkins gives a marvelous answer. I'm more inclined towards a general and somewhat more complete explanation of biological evolution. As I noted in my response to the question here, and perhaps opting for an even more humorous reply.

There are generally two different understandings of evolution, one is a strawman setup to tell people that evolution doesn't make any sense at all by slandering the theory with false and untrue remarks which leads to question of why there are still other apes, whereas the other version of evolution is the real and solid science of biology. While I admire Dawkins answer for being clear and very good at explaining the error made in the question, the rest of evolutionary theory isn't obvious. From this answer and anybody asking the question doesn't really know.

Why do species diversify? Why do the species fall into a tree like that? The core problem is they don't have a good and understanding of the actual theory. They have a strawman and their strawman suggests that's a good question. To *REALLY* answer the question, one needs to give a quick and understandable run through the actual theory at it's most basic. I think Darwin gave the most thought to how to explain evolution to the uninducted. I think his explanation from Malthus to the struggle for existence, and then a clear explanation of taxonomy is going to be the quickest road to Rome. With this nugget of truth, it can quickly be used to expand and show why the question is wrong with the given sort of taxonomy explanation.