Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GodGunsGuts

Here is a popular press review of the same data. Your “logical impossibility” is clearly the reality that biologists must deal with. Humans and chimps are closer in DNA than either is to a gorilla.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=nw20070224080303465C200804

Experts agree that humans split off from a common ancestor with chimpanzees several million years ago and that gorillas and orangutans split off much earlier.

Experts have long known that humans and chimpanzees share much DNA, and are in fact 96 percent identical on the genetic level.


344 posted on 12/02/2008 3:26:40 PM PST by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed.... so how could it be Redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies ]


To: allmendream

If you are indeed a scientist, as you say you are, why do you need popular press reviews to interpret the data?


345 posted on 12/02/2008 7:54:13 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies ]

To: allmendream
==Experts agree that humans split off from a common ancestor with chimpanzees several million years ago and that gorillas and orangutans split off much earlier.

It would seem YOUR "experts" are starting to question the Temple of Darwin's Human-Chimp catechism:

Fig.1

"To understand why regions in the human genome can differ in their evolutionary history, it needs to be acknowledged that genetic lineages represented by DNA sequences in the extant species trace back to allelic variants in the shared ancestral species (Nei 1987) (fig. 1). In here, these variants persist until they join in their most recent common ancestor (MRCA). Some genetic lineages, however, do not coalesce in the progenitor exclusively shared by humans and chimpanzees. They enter, together with the lineage descending from the gorilla, the ancestral population of all 3 species, where any 2 of the 3 lineages can merge first. Thus, in two-thirds of the cases, a genealogy results in which humans and chimpanzees are not each other's closest genetic relatives. The corresponding genealogies are incongruent with the species tree. In concordance with the experimental evidences, this implies that there is no such thing as a unique evolutionary history of the human genome. Rather, it resembles a patchwork of individual regions following their own genealogy."

Mapping Human Genetic Ancestry. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2007 24(10):2266-2276; doi:10.1093/molbev/msm156

347 posted on 12/03/2008 9:16:07 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson