- Dec 13, 2019
- 1,803
- 463
If you just connect all the dots, isn’t it easy to see how the first humans could evolve from a shared ancestor with the apes?
Continue reading...
Continue reading...
-
-
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join Hidden in Him and For His Glory for discussions on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/become-a-vessel-of-honor-part-2.112306/
[__ Science __ ] Making the Leap from Ape to Adam
- Thread starter AIG.com
- Start date
- Jun 5, 2003
- 33,356
- 2,557
From TV shows to zoo signs, textbooks, and more, we often hear or read that human and chimp DNA is 98–99% the same, proving our shared ancestry. But is that true?
Surprisingly, even the evolutionists would agree it’s false. In a telling article titled, “Relative Differences: The Myth of 1%,” the author (an evolutionist) wrote, “Genomewise [referring to the DNA inside the nucleus of the cell], humans and chimpanzees are quite similar, but studies are showing that they are not as similar as many tend to believe.”
The similarity depends on how you measure it. It's technical and while it is true that chimpanzees and humans line up to be about 1% different in total DNA, a closer look at specific genes indicates they are more distantly related. Which isn't surprising.
Chimpanzees are the closest living relatives of humans. The divergence between human and chimpanzee ancestors dates to approximately 6,5–7,5 million years ago. Genetic features distinguishing us from chimpanzees and making us humans are still of a great interest. After divergence of their ancestor lineages, human and chimpanzee genomes underwent multiple changes including single nucleotide substitutions, deletions and duplications of DNA fragments of different size, insertion of transposable elements and chromosomal rearrangements. Human-specific single nucleotide alterations constituted 1.23% of human DNA, whereas more extended deletions and insertions cover ~ 3% of our genome. Moreover, much higher proportion is made by differential chromosomal inversions and translocations comprising several megabase-long regions or even whole chromosomes.
What creationists won't tell you, is that no matter which method you use, humans and chimps turn out to be more closely related to each other than either is to any other animal. When we compare different species, we compare fixed site. So we compare genes for which virtually all humans have a specific nucleotides, with the same genes in chimps.
But regardless of the measurement methods, chimps and humans always come up as each other's closest relative.
It's not just the many, many transitional fossils that YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise describes as "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory." It's also the genetic evidence.
Surprisingly, even the evolutionists would agree it’s false. In a telling article titled, “Relative Differences: The Myth of 1%,” the author (an evolutionist) wrote, “Genomewise [referring to the DNA inside the nucleus of the cell], humans and chimpanzees are quite similar, but studies are showing that they are not as similar as many tend to believe.”
The similarity depends on how you measure it. It's technical and while it is true that chimpanzees and humans line up to be about 1% different in total DNA, a closer look at specific genes indicates they are more distantly related. Which isn't surprising.
Differences between human and chimpanzee genomes and their implications in gene expression, protein functions and biochemical properties of the two species
BMC Genomics 10 September 2020Chimpanzees are the closest living relatives of humans. The divergence between human and chimpanzee ancestors dates to approximately 6,5–7,5 million years ago. Genetic features distinguishing us from chimpanzees and making us humans are still of a great interest. After divergence of their ancestor lineages, human and chimpanzee genomes underwent multiple changes including single nucleotide substitutions, deletions and duplications of DNA fragments of different size, insertion of transposable elements and chromosomal rearrangements. Human-specific single nucleotide alterations constituted 1.23% of human DNA, whereas more extended deletions and insertions cover ~ 3% of our genome. Moreover, much higher proportion is made by differential chromosomal inversions and translocations comprising several megabase-long regions or even whole chromosomes.
What creationists won't tell you, is that no matter which method you use, humans and chimps turn out to be more closely related to each other than either is to any other animal. When we compare different species, we compare fixed site. So we compare genes for which virtually all humans have a specific nucleotides, with the same genes in chimps.
But regardless of the measurement methods, chimps and humans always come up as each other's closest relative.
It's not just the many, many transitional fossils that YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise describes as "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory." It's also the genetic evidence.
