"Why do you think they call it a MONKEY WRENCH?"
Posted on 01/18/2011 2:10:14 PM PST by wendy1946
I'm seeing this one at numerous points on the web this afternoon, including anthropology.net and Nature Magazine's website, best seems to be the Hawks blog I'm citing as an url.
The gist of the story seems to be that the chimpanzee genome study published in 05 was seriously flawed and tht the corresponding idea of the genetic gap between modern man and the chimpanzee is no longer operative.
Hawk is clearly an evolutionist looking for evolutionist solutions, but he appears to state the problem accurately:
..."Indeed, at 6 million years of separation, the difference in MSY gene content in chimpanzee and human is more comparable to the difference in autosomal gene content in chicken and human, at 310 million years of separation."
Snarky, but funny.
Thus by your argument you personally share 100% of the DNA of Musca domestica, but not their intellect.
;-p
"Why do you think they call it a MONKEY WRENCH?"
The standard human genetic make up is 23 chromosomes. The human haploid genome contains 3,000,000,000 DNA nucleotide pairs, divided among twenty two (22) pairs of autosomes and one pair of sex chromosomes (X/Y, or X/X). The Y chromosome alone has 24 million base pairs. And the study on this is just one small fraction of one section of those base pairs.
To put it in high level terms, in referencing the full difference, it is like saying we are no longer 98% alike but 97.999999999% alike.
The new study says we’re about as far from chimps as we are from chickens.
“Home James! Chimpanzee Acts as Owner’s Chauffeur (Sep, 1929)
No it doesn't, it says the MSY gene shows a rate of difference between 6 million years of change between man and chimp as it does with 640 million years of change between man and chicken. This is a sub fractional difference and doesn't reflect the entire genome and really only represents what has changed over time- something accelerated the change in the MSY section of the Y chromosome in chimps.
In layman's terms, it is like looking at a Camaro, a bicycle, and a Ferrari, and finding that the way one component in the transmission is bolted more similarly in the Camaro and bicycle than the Camaro and Ferrari. It doesn't mean the Camaro is now more similar to the bicycle than the Ferrari, it just means this one bolt is.
if I remember the study correctly when I read it about 6 months ago, they were talking about the full genomic sequencing of both dna’s vs comparing some monkey genes to what was then known about human dna. Were talking here about what was thought to be “active dna” vs active and junk dna”, which has now been shown not to be junk.
I love these threads when ‘strict’ evolutionists get into with ‘strict’ anti-evolutionists.
I have a simpler question.
Since chimps and humans DO have a non-matching chromosome set ... when the first ‘human’ was born with the human number and type of chromosomes ... and it reached the age of sexual maturity ... what did it mate with that had matching chromosomes (gametes actually) and could thus produce viable and fertile offspring?
I understand how the first ‘human’ could appear via a mutation. But as the first and only, how did it procreate without matching gametes out there?
Inquiring minds ...
Thanks, seems like this will come in handy.
Well, that is fine except for the fact that the argument about the bolt was used to establish the Camaro - Ferrari relationship. IOW when it suited the preconception it was okay to draw conclusions from bolts. Now it isn't.
This finding reminds me of those debates.
The creationists predicted that science would find that *junk* DNA was not junk after all.
Likewise, we’ve been saying that man and chimps or any other apes, aren’t related. Sure there are similarities, but that would be expected from creatures who physically resemble each other to some extent, and who inhabit the same environment.
Since we all eat the same food, drink the same water, breathe the same air, there is, of necessity, going to be similarities in metabolism and organ function, but that does NOT preclude a designer.
The similarities between man and anything are no proof (or evidence) of evolution.
That one bolt wasn’t, in my analogy, each car represents the entire genome. If you go to the original source, you can see that what this article references is one base pair in one chromosome, or one in 24 million part of that specific chromosome. The OP has misrepresented the results of the finding that it represented the entire genome being that much different.
There HAS to be a designer, evolution simply doesn’t work and this new finding should just about be the final nail.
Speaking of programmers, I’m amazed when scientists claim that chimps and humans are 98% similar in their DNA program, and that somehow is not a problem. However, when computor programs get changed by just a minute percent, nothing works correctly.
Here, I type the sentence “Science is simply amazing” but I’ll shift my hands over one key space and see what I produce....
Dvormvr od do,[;u s,sxomh/
Gibberish. I’m not a scientist or a programmer, but I have read enough about the complexity of cells to know that even a small change results in disaster.
While I’m not against doing great study in these areas, what I have found in my searching, is that it takes far greater faith to believe we humans and animals evolved through billions of years and mutations then to believe we were all created this way with all of our own similarities but also with all of our own uniqueness.
...the X chromosome shows a substantially lower level of genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees...
“Gibberish. I’m not a scientist or a programmer, but I have read enough about the complexity of cells to know that even a small change results in disaster.”
Well you are right about one thing: you are definitely not a scientist. Genes have a considerable redundancy in function and there are many codons where changing a nucleotide causes no change in the resulting amino acid.
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.