But interesting how you interpret this GGG, because you think there is no descent allowed you falsely conclude that because this paper came out the entire field now accepts their premise. That is false and a rather idiotic view of what actually happens in science.
This is one of the last gasps of the morphologists picking a rather ridiculous hill to die on. They didn't appreciate the molecular guys running roughshod over their data and telling them where they were right and wrong and pointing out just how arbitrary picking points of morphological comparison is. .
The ICR article that I posted earlier, entitled “Human-Chimp Similarities: Common Ancestry or Flawed Research?”, makes it clear that the supposed 98-99% human-chimp genetic similarity is pure balderdash. As the article points out, there are studies that put that number as low as 86%. Face it, the Evos have got it pretty much all wrong since the time of Darwin. They have lost their “tree of life”, they have lost their fossil/”junk” DNA, they are losing the human-chimp similarity fantasy, they never had the fossil record, they are finding dinos with soft tissue still intact, etc, etc, etc!!! Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that you have become a biblical creationist in the not too distant future. I know you cringe at the thought now, but someday I think your conscience will compel you to make the switch, no matter what your evo colleagues may think of you.
“The arguments used for common descent are still just as strong as before these morphologists starting comparing measurements; as it is based upon DNA, not morphological features.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2296362/posts