"One year following Watson and Cricks Nobel ceremony, chemist Emile Zuckerkandl observed that the protein sequence of hemoglobin in humans and the gorilla differed by only 1 out of 287 amino acids. Zuckerkandl noted: From the point of view of hemoglobin structure, it appears that the gorilla is just an abnormal human, or man an abnormal gorilla, and the two species form actually one continuous population (1963, p. 247). "
"Jonathan Marks, (department of anthropology, University of California, Berkeley) has pointed out the often-overlooked problem with this similarity line of thinking."
"Because DNA is a linear array of those four basesA,G,C, and Tonly four possibilities exist at any specific point in a DNA sequence. The laws of chance tell us that two random sequences from species that have no ancestry in common will match at about one in every four sites. Thus even two unrelated DNA sequences will be 25 percent identical, not 0 percent identical (2000, p. B-7).
Therefore a human and any earthly DNA-based life form must be at least 25% identical. Would it be correct, then, to state that daffodils are one-quarter human? The idea that a flower is one-quarter human is neither profound nor enlightening; it is outlandishly ridiculous! There is hardly any biological comparison that could be conducted that would make daffodils humanexcept perhaps DNA. Marks went on to concede: Moreover, the genetic comparison is misleading because it ignores qualitative differences among genomes.... Thus, even among such close relatives as human and chimpanzee, we find that the chimps genome is estimated to be about 10 percent larger than the humans; that one human chromosome contains a fusion of two small chimpanzee chromosomes; and that the tips of each chimpanzee chromosome contain a DNA sequence that is not present in humans (B-7, emp. added).
The truth is, if we consider the absolute amount of genetic material when comparing primates and humans, the 1-2% difference in DNA represents approximately 80 million different nucleotides (compared to the 3-4 billion nucleotides that make up the entire human genome). To help make this number understandable, consider the fact that if evolutionists had to pay you one penny for every nucleotide in that 1-2% difference between the human and the chimp, you would walk away with $800,000. Given those proportions, 1-2% does not appear so small, does it? "
"One of the downfalls of previous molecular genetic studies has been the limit at which chimpanzees and humans could be compared accurately. Scientists often would use only 30 or 40 known proteins or nucleic acid sequences, and then from those extrapolate their results for the entire genome. Today, however, we have the majority of the human genome sequences, practically all of which have been released and made public. This allows scientists to compare every single nucleotide base pair between humans and primatessomething that was not possible prior to the human genome project. In January 2002, a study was published in which scientists had constructed and analyzed a first-generation human chimpanzee comparative genomic map. This study compared the alignments of 77,461 chimpanzee bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) end sequences to human genomic sequences. Fujiyama and colleagues detected candidate positions, including two clusters on human chromosome 21, that suggest large, nonrandom regions of differences between the two genomes (2002, 295:131). In other words, the comparison revealed some large differences between the genomes of chimps and humans.
Amazingly, the authors found that only 48.6% of the whole human genome matched chimpanzee nucleotide sequences. [Only 4.8% of the human Y chromosome could be matched to chimpanzee sequences.] This study compared the alignments of 77,461 chimpanzee sequences to human genomic sequences obtained from public databases. Of these, 36,940 end sequences were unable to be mapped to the human genome (295:131). Almost 15,000 of those sequences that did not match human sequences were speculated to correspond to unsequenced human regions or are from chimpanzee regions that have diverged substantially from humans or did not match for other unknown reasons (295:132). While the authors noted that the quality and usefulness of the map should increasingly improve as the finishing of the human genome sequence proceeds (295:134), the data already support what creationists have said for yearsthe 98-99% figure representing DNA similarity is grossly misleading, as revealed in a study carried out by Roy Britten of the California Institute of Technology (see Britten, 2002). .."
REFERENCES:
Barbulescu, Madalina, Geoffrey Turner, Mei Su, Rachel Kim, Michael I. Jensen-Seaman, Amos S. Deinard, Kenneth K. Kidd, and Jack Lentz (2001), A HERV-K Provirus in Chimpanzees, Bonobos, and Gorillas, but not Humans, Current Biology, 11:779-783.
Britten, Roy J. (2002), Divergence between Samples of Chimpanzee and Human DNA Sequences is 5%, Counting Intels, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99:13633-13635, October 15.
Coghlan, Andy (2002), Human-chimp DNA Difference Trebled,ׇ [On-line], URL: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992833, September 23.
Fix, William R. (1984), The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution (New York: Macmillan).
Fujiyama, Asao, Hidemi Watanabe, et al., (2002), Construction and Analysis of a Human-Chimpanzee Comparative Clone Map, Science, 295:131-134, January 4.
Lyons, Eric and Bert Thompson (2002a), In the Image and Likeness of God [Part I], Reason & Revelation, 22:17-23, March.
Lyons, Eric and Bert Thompson (2002b), In the Image and Likeness of God [Part II], Reason & Revelation, 22:25-31, April.
REFERENCES
Marks, Jonathan (2000), 98% Alike? (What Similarity to Apes Tells Us About Our Understanding of Genetics), The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 12.
Gardner, Eldon J. (1968), Principles of Genetics (New York: John Wiley and Sons).
King, Mary-Claire and A.C. Wilson (1975), Evolution at Two Levels in Humans and Chimpanzees, Science, 188:107-116, April 11.
Morgan, Elaine (1989), The Aquatic Ape: A Theory of Human Evolution (London: Souvenir Press).
Pennisi, Elizabeth (2002), Jumbled DNA Separates Chimps and Humans, Science, 298:719-721, October 25.
Shouse, Ben (2002), Revisiting the Numbers: Human Genes and Whales, Science, 295:1457, February 22.
Sinnot, E.W., L.C. Dunn, and T. Dobzhansky (1958), Principles of Genetics (Columbus, OH: McGraw Hill) fifth edition.
Schwabe, Christian (1986), On the Validity of Molecular Evolution, Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 11:280-283, July. Toder, R. F. Grutzner, T. Haaf, and E. Bausch (2001), Species-Specific Evolution of Repeated DNA sequences in Great Apes, Chromosome Research, 9:431-435.
Zuckerkandl, Emile (1963), Perspectives in Molecular Anthropology, Classification and Human Evolution, ed. S.L. Washburn (Chicago, IL: Aldine).
Muchmore, Elaine A., Sandra Diaz, and Ajit Varki (1998), A Structural Difference Between the Cell Surfaces of Humans and the Great Apes, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 107[2]:187-198, October.
Apologetics Press, Inc.