[allmendream]

Yes, it has long been known that non-genetic DNA is not as highly conserved between species as genetic DNA.
Creationists conflate the 99% genetic DNA similarity between humans and chimps and the 95% or so similarity between genomic DNA, knowing the woeful lack of education on average of their target audience - they are pretty confident the dupes of their disinformation will not catch on.

They also assume that any non-genetic DNA is “regulatory” and that is not at all true. A lot of it is just “junk” DNA - possibly previously of use, possibly of future use - but currently in the genomic “basement” boxed up in chromatin.

Moreover the non genetic DNA comports exactly with what one would expect if humans and chimps diverged from a common population some six or seven million years ago, as does the genetic DNA. The pattern of little change in highly conserved DNA and more change in less conserved DNA and a lot more change in “junk” DNA is exactly what is observed in other animals of known common ancestry.

[mas cerveza por favor]

A lot of it is just “junk” DNA - possibly previously of use, possibly of future use - but currently in the genomic “basement” boxed up in chromatin.

You are behind the times. That "junk" theory was revised years ago. Do a search.