==When you say “ape” you mean gorilla?
I was using ape because it is shorter to type than gorilla, and I was distinguishing between ape and chimp. So from now on, when I use the word ape in the same sentence with chimp, I mean gorilla unless otherwise noted.
==The authors conclude that chimps and humans diverged some 4 million years ago. Their data indicates that chimps humans and gorillas diverged at greater than 4 million years ago.
But they also leave open the possiblity that humans and chimps diverged from apes, but not from each other. Thus, even from a Darwiniac point of view, your open and shut case is not an open and shut case any more.
The authors included all possibilities and tallied them up quantitatively; this is often done in “the scientific method”, where alternate ideas are given a chance to see if the data conforms. The data that fit the assumption that humans and gorillas were more similar than human and chimp was a “significant fraction”, but obviously not a majority. The majority of the data fit the assumption that humans and chimps are more similar than either is to a gorilla.
Thus their conclusion was that time 1 from the chart your included was for the chimp human split and was about 4 million years ago. The arrow pointing to the gorilla split, you may notice, had time 1 plus time 2. Obviously time 1 plus time 2 gives a greater amount of time than just time 1; but maybe I need to point that out to you, as you seem completely oblivious to the data that you yourself posted.
Their conclusion, from a paper you sourced, was that what you called the “logical impossibility” of humans and chimps being closer in their DNA than either is to a gorilla is in fact the case.
Now you say that the authors you sourced are blinded by ideology. How did their ideology change either their summation of the DNA differences or the DNA data do you suppose?