"In 2005, molecular biologist and creation scientist Dan Criswell wrote:
However, such sequence similarity was based only on a fraction [less than four percent] of the total genome of man and chimpanzees,.........."
The. Smartest guy I know looks like a cave man. Huge body, small head with sloped forehead. I would trust him with anything that needs figuring out. I often wonder, if scientists in the future would dig him up what they would think of humanity right now. Something like what some scientists think of old bones they have found already?
“Our findings are generally consistent with the notion that the morphological and behavioral differences between humans and chimpanzees are predominately due to differences in the regulation of genes rather than to differences in the sequence of the genes themselves.”
The headline makes no sense. If the actual genes that are expressed are 98% similar, that is very strong evidence of a close evolutionary relationship. The junk DNA doesnt code for anything so it is free to mutate without any negative consequences so of course it will have less similarity.
Is the author imposing a belief on those he's criticizing, or do evolutionary biologists actually argue that this is a "MUST HAVE" occurrence/conclustion, leaving nothing else as a possible explanation?
Really? I hadn't realized this was a specialty, or that the Bible was a text on genetics.
I am not thrilled with the way the georgia tech study is quoted and surrounded by creation scientist quotes.
I am willing to bet the findings of the scientists that actually performed the study differ significantly from those of the creation scientists.
-C L Emerson
I know for a fact a cheeky Kenyan bastard running around the States is a direct descendent from chimps.
Yep. I remember hearing a few years back that our DNA is closer to a cockroach’s DNA than to a monkey’s DNA. Well, now I understand Democrats.