"You are so totally dishonest, that is what boggles the mind."
Sorry, that doesn't constitute any evidence that humans and corn share a 97% genetic similarity. Try again! :)
I have faith in you, Miss Pie.
Where, exactly, was I "so totally dishonest"? Be specific, or retract your false slander. Or heck, go ahead and let it stand, as a monument to your lack of honor.
The same argument you just used regarding Miami and Kansas City can also be applied to the relationship between chimp and man in the amino acid chain as well.
Sure, one *could* use your silly line of reasoning in that manner, but only if one wanted to be as dishonest as you were when you used a ludicrously invalid "method" to come up with your false and moronic claim that "there is only a 3% difference between a man and an ear of corn"... (Speaking of which, when *are* you going to retract that goofy assertion, or at least admit you erred?)
But biologists aren't as incompetent/dishonest as the average anti-evolutionist, and thus they use straightforward and *valid* methods like DIRECT COMPARISON to determine the level of DNA similarity between chimp and man, not by the sort of goofy sleight-of-hand *you* used to make your FALSE claim about man and corn.
To claim such a kinship between man and chimp is as far fetched as claiming a kinship between man and and ear of corn.
...only to people too grossly ignorant of DNA comparison methods to understand how the comparisons are actually done, and how its findings overwhelmingly support "such a kinship between man and chimp", in multiple independently cross-validating ways...
To deny that these percentages cause huge differences between funi, plant, animal, is just more flim flam.
Where in the hell did you hallucinate that anyone had claimed that DNA differences aren't the cause of the huge differences between "funi [sic], plant, animal"? Mistake your fantasies for reality much? You've certainly done it a lot on *this* thread, anyway.