[allmendream]

No, the figure of a 2% difference in genetic DNA is only subject to skepticism by those who don't understand that we have sequenced the genome of both chimps and humans and can compare the DNA of their genes.

Even the highest figure of the entire genome (a much larger set of data, as only about 3% of the genome is genetic DNA) is 10% if you “score” deletions and insertions differently; I gave the figure as 6%.

Why would there have to be so many different species to explain such a trifling difference in DNA?

The observed rate of change within the species more than explains the observed difference, if there is indeed six million years separating the two (TWO distinct populations, not thousands) species.

[reasonisfaith]

Describe the “observed” change.

To establish evolution as fact necessarily requires a detailed description of the intermediate species, including a description of the corresponding changes in both phenotype and genotype.

This sort of documentation—required for scientific validity—has never been done, for any evolutionary process.

Not even for a single one of these supposed transitions.