A sequence divergence of 50% is humongous. The sequence of DNA is what encodes the function of a protein. Most proteins do not allow anything close to such change without losing function. In part 3 of the article posted cytochrome c was given as supporting evidence for evolution due to its malleability and its use to tell what species (supposedly) came first. The point of my argument is that the article "proving" evolution is self-contradictory.