In recent years, genome mapping has enabled detailed comparisons between the DNA of humans and that of chimpanzees. Many have claimed that humans and chimpanzees share over 98% of their DNA. This is often taken as decisive evidence of the common ancestry of apes and humans. But is this argument tenable? Is this really a fact which definitively proves a human-chimp common ancestry? It is our contention that the percentage is misleading. In fact, when the data is examined more closely, the human-chimp genome comparisons turn out to contradict what would be predicted by evolution.
In reality, the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees are probably greater than 2%. More recent studies have shown that the true genetic divergence between humans and apes is probably closer to 5%. Thus, the "over 98% similarity" argument is probably an overstatement.
The differences between the DNA sequence of the human and the chimp are not distributed randomly throughout the genome. Rather, the differences are found in clusters. Actually, at those specific locations, the chimp's genome is similar to that of other primates. It is the human that stands out from the rest. Scientists often refer to these "clusters" as human accelerated regions (HAR's) because the human genome supposedly shared a common ancestor with chimps. These HAR's are located in DNA segments that do not code for genes. But this requires us to believe that evolution just so happened to cause such rapid change to occur in sites where those changes make an important difference in an organism's functioning necessary to ultimately create a human.
Such would be a whopper of a just-so story. But it gets better. Some HAR's are found in DNA segments that do code for genes, and herein lies another multitude of difficulties. Evolution would predict that humans evolved from the chimp-human ancestor via natural selection acting on chance variations induced by mutations. However, recent research reveals just the opposite. The HAR's that were found in protein coding genes showed evidence not of mutations that had been selected in view of their advantageous phenotype, but rather the exact opposite. The genetic changes showed evidence that they were, in point of fact, deleterious. They had become established in the population not because they provided some physiological advantage, but in spite of being deleterious. Such results make little sense within an evolutionary framework.
Clearly, the HAR's show a trend in which the differences observed in the human DNA (as compared to similar species) typically increase the G-C content of that particular region of the DNA strand. Evolution would predict that the G-C content of the underlying gene should remain relatively constant, as natural selection picks out the DNA mutations that improve the protein. If evolution is true, therefore, we should not expect a consistent trend toward an increasing G-C content.
These HAR's are not always limited simply to the protein coding part of the gene, but often extend beyond the border into the flanking sequences. This further suggests that these differences which are observed in the human DNA are not, in fact, consequences of natural selection enhancing the protein that the gene encodes. The HAR's often tend to cluster in a single part of a gene, in and around a single exon (as opposed to across the entire gene), and they tend to correlate with male (but not female) recombination. Such observations make little sense in light of evolution.
In conclusion, as interesting as genetic similarities between chimpanzees and humans are, they are not evidence for Darwinism. Design is also able to explain them. Designers often make different products by utilization of similar parts, materials and arrangements. The common percentage pertains to the regions of our DNA that result in proteins. It makes more sense of the data for the Designer of nature to have used the same proteins to perform the same function in a variety of organisms.
Loading...
14:48
Miss USA 2011 - Should Evolution be taught in schoolby nofaithmedia490 views
Wow. Seriously, WOW. If you twisted the facts any more you would snap them in half.
alianchild 1 month ago
wow you sure do like to lie...
PinkProgram 1 month ago
@roddy35wv "May God Bless"
Bless my cock. Then suck it.
fdasherv 1 month ago
When you take into account the 76% of the two genomes which are alignable including SNP's Indels and copy number variations the total similarity is actually 70%. Once we can align the maximum it may be even lower than 70%. This is published in the 2005 Draft and in the Journal Nature.
benthemiester 4 months ago
It didn't "just so happen," natural selection causes changes that "occur in sites where those changes make an important difference in an organism's functioning" to get past on. This video takes the exact evidence that is predicted by evolution and claims "Such would be a whopper of a just-so story," hey, if you have no evidence to support your claim, present evidence supporting your opponent and pretend it supports you.
PeriodicPoint 5 months ago
This video is misleading rubbish, and all lies.. (but you already knew that, didn't you?)
effyleven 5 months ago
***********WARNING*************
This video is nothing but lies, distortions of the real facts and stuff that is just plain retarded.
BlueAvantiGuy 5 months ago
Do you know that your reactions are predicted in the Bible?In the end times there will be scoffers and mockers of God. They will profess themselves wise,only to remain fools and the fool says in their heart there is no God. Doesen't that sound like today?Do you REALLY think you are no more than just an educated monkey? Or are we wonderfully and fearfully created by a powerful sentient being? Could it be that by saying no to him,you are saying YES to satan?No Hell? Are you sure? May God Bless
roddy35wv 6 months ago
98%,,,,,hahahaha
1980vince 8 months ago
Cars and motorbikes share lots of common features - some the same - spark plugs, electrical system - same light bulbs, same type of rubber tyres...they are all intelligently designed - both share similarities to a toaster - same metal for the outer shell, same plastic as dashboard used for feet, same numbers on darkness dial as rev-counter, but cars and bikes have not decended from toasters! - designers copy components and often use same materials on different productions!
TREACLE97 1 year ago