I thought my explanation was sufficient but I will explain it in more detail for you.
It is called a “phylogenetic tree” and it shows the evidence (one data point out of many thousands) of common descent from DNA comparison of a segment of DNA common to all the species. Each species has a different sequence there, and the most “parsimonious” tree arranges the similar with the similar and the divergent further away.
This tree, unlike many others, includes the actual numbers of DNA differences that they were counting for this particular data point (there have been several methods and sequences used and all derive the same tree).
This particular tree shows that humans and chimps are closer to each other than either is to a gorilla. If you are counting the differences would be...
Human-chimp= 42+28 = 70 DNA differences
Human-gorilla=42+16+42= 100 DNA differences
chimp-gorilla=28+16+42= 86 DNA differences
This is the pattern we see repeated over and over again. Every tree we make based upon data shows that humans and chimps are closer than either is to a gorilla.
Now I know you're making this up! Only God can make a tree.
(Humor break)
[[It is called a “phylogenetic tree” and it shows the evidence (one data point out of many thousands) of common descent from DNA comparison of a segment of DNA common to all the species.]]
Actually no it doesn’t show the evidence- what it does show however is how much sceintsits are willign to stretch believability in order to make hte evidence fit in with hteir models. There are huge leaps of faith with absolutely zero evidence involved in linking those dissimilar kinds- however, there’s good news- Baraminology more closely follows the actual evidence, and doesn’t have to rely on unsupported assumptions- and guess what? The fossil records show discontinuity. however, the phylogentic tree leaps beyond these discontinuities, and asserts things that just simply don’t show up in the fossil records- contrary to popular belief, the tree (or bush, or Or shrub, or whatever you folsk are calling it these days) isn’t nearly as smoothly laid out as they pretend it is.
your DNA tree very well also might show common design instead of common decent too eh? Nah- couldn’t be- has to be naturalistic descent- otherwise it just isn’t scientific eh?