Human(s) Chromosome 2 resulted from the Fusion of two Ape Chromosomes: Easily seen.

[abu afak]

You have the same dishonest standard to meet your faith in science, even though you admit science has not answered the question where did we come from, how did we get here, why are we here and where are we going next? Yet, you are unwilling to look at other possibilities.

Not at all.
but "other possibilities" have to have some semblance of EVIDENCE.

Your comments about humans and apes are not true. The way the so-called scientists came up with 99% the same DNA was disingenuous and false. When you don't take out those DNA links that do not line up, it's more like 85% and I've seen lower.

LINK?

That's a huge difference. Not only that, the 6 million years from our supposedly common ancestor mutation doesn't work either. Science keeps stretching out the time period now to 13.5 million. But, that's way off as well. I invite you to watch the video and at least know what you are talking about and/or trying to say is wrong. You remind me of my grandson who will not eat some food, not even taste it to see if he'd like it or not. He's 17. Watch the video so we can have an intelligent conversation.

Actually, videos are Not a good way to have a conversation as the author and his claims are not as well laid out nor oft documentable. They oft proceed on an opening False premise and mix in a few more.
Just like you just did with your wrong take on well known and accepted similarity of primate DNA percentages. No source. (which will turn out to be a creationist website, to 'confirm' the creationist youtube?)

Your statement about religions are dead ends when exploring the universe is also false. You might want to educate yourself with the studies at many of the religious schools around the world before making such an ignorant statement like this. I remember when I was at BYU back in the late 1970's being introduced to Steven Hawkins in the science building. You might like to know that the father of the TV was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I don't see a single fact in there. Unless you're claiming Hawking thinks "god did it."
Why would one expect to find info about a natural/scientific cause from people whose purpose is defending (indeed spreading) their religious creationism/doctrine that predates any real science.

.

 

[Cougarbear]

What dishonest standard is there for science to meet? There certainly is no faith required in science. That's a standard creationist claim. There is no faith required in the study of medicine, paleontology, biology or any of the other physical sciences. If something is known, there is no faith required.

My comments about humans and primates certainly were true. The data is available on most any science based website. You can deny the facts but that doesn't make the facts do away. The youtube video you cut and pasted was supposed to be a joke? As with all the extremist Christian ministries, they are bound by a ''statement of faith'', that requires all evidence to conform to extremist Christian dogma. It' both dishonest and presumptuous to expect others to accept the bias and predetermined positions of religious extremists.

If my comments about religions being dead ends when exploring the universe are false, make your case for an alternate position. Tell us what the religious institutions are doing to advance our understanding of the natural world. What research papers prepared by the religious institutions have been submitted to the National Science Foundation, for example? Identify one.

For the primary chimp chromosomes (autosomes), the amount of optimally aligned DNA sequence provided similarities between 66 and 76 percent, depending on the chromosome. In general, the smaller and more gene-dense chromosomes showed higher DNA sequence similarity—although there were several notable exceptions. Only 69 percent of the chimpanzee X chromosome (female sex chromosome) and only 43 percent of the Y chromosome was similar to human DNA. Genome-wide, only 70 percent of the chimpanzee genome assembly was similar to human DNA under the most optimal sequence-slice conditions. These results actually confirm previous research where omitted data were included to produce much lower estimates of DNA similarity between humans and chimps for previously published secular reports.5, 6 - Chromosome Comparison Shows More Chimp-Human Differences

So, basically, the evolutionary studies cherry picked where they studied the DNA from Chimps and Humans skewing the results. honestly, evolutionist have to do this to force us to believe Humans and Chimps are close relatives. They do this with fossil evidence with Artie and Lucy as well. Just to force people to believe in evolution because they have so much invested.

 

[Hollie]

For the primary chimp chromosomes (autosomes), the amount of optimally aligned DNA sequence provided similarities between 66 and 76 percent, depending on the chromosome. In general, the smaller and more gene-dense chromosomes showed higher DNA sequence similarity—although there were several notable exceptions. Only 69 percent of the chimpanzee X chromosome (female sex chromosome) and only 43 percent of the Y chromosome was similar to human DNA. Genome-wide, only 70 percent of the chimpanzee genome assembly was similar to human DNA under the most optimal sequence-slice conditions. These results actually confirm previous research where omitted data were included to produce much lower estimates of DNA similarity between humans and chimps for previously published secular reports.5, 6 - Chromosome Comparison Shows More Chimp-Human Differences

So, basically, the evolutionary studies cherry picked where they studied the DNA from Chimps and Humans skewing the results. honestly, evolutionist have to do this to force us to believe Humans and Chimps are close relatives. They do this with fossil evidence with Artie and Lucy as well. Just to force people to believe in evolution because they have so much invested.

So basically, you provided no defendable evidence. Using charlatans at extremist ministries is really just a joke because we both know that creation ministries do no research and publish in no peer reviewed literature.

let’s not pretend that the charlatans at ICR are either honest or credible. I note that the ICR charlatans identify “… previously published secular reports”.

Is there a difference between fundamentalist Christian reports and secular evilutionist atheist reports?

Let’s examine the objective standards of extremist Christian ministries.

Principles of Biblical Creationism​

Foundational Principles

www.icr.org

The Creator of the universe is a triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is only one eternal and transcendent God, the source of all being and meaning, and He exists in three Persons, each of whom participated in the work of creation.

• The Bible, consisting of the 39 canonical books of the Old Testament and the 27 canonical books of the New Testament, is the divinely inspired revelation of the Creator to man. Its unique, plenary, verbal inspiration guarantees that these writings, as originally and miraculously given, are infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.
• All things in the universe were created and made by God in the six literal days of the creation week described in Genesis 1:1–2:3, and confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual, historical, and perspicuous; thus, all theories of origins or development that involve evolution in any form are false. All things that now exist are sustained and ordered by God’s providential care. However, a part of the spiritual creation, Satan and his angels, rebelled against God after the creation and are attempting to thwart His divine purposes in creation.

On the other hand, I will give you peer reviewed data that remarkably has a list of references, admittedly to evilutionist atheist science sources:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science
Journal of Heredity
Nature
Journal of Molecular Evolution

Gee, whiz. I guess science got nuthin’ on Jimmy Swaggert.

CB144: Human/chimp genome difference

1. The difference between chimpanzees and humans due to single-nucleotide substitutions averages 1.23 percent, of which 1.06 percent or less is due to fixed divergence, and the rest being a result of polymorphism within chimp populations and within human populations. Insertion and deletion (indel) events account for another approximately 3 percent difference between chimp and human sequences, but each indel typically involves multiple nucleotides. The number of genetic changes from indels is a fraction of the number of single-nucleotide substitutions (roughly 5 million compared with roughly 35 million). So describing humans and chimpanzees as 98 to 99 percent identical is entirely appropriate (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005).
   
   
2. The difference measurement depends on what you are measuring. If you measure the number of proteins for which the entire protein is identical in the two species, humans and chimpanzees are 29 percent identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005). If you measure nonsynonymous base pair differences within protein coding regions, humans and chimps are 99.75 percent identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005, fig. 9). The original 98.4 percent estimate came from DNA hybridization experiments, which measured (indirectly, via DNA melting temperature) sequence difference among short segments of the genomes that are similar enough to hybridize but with repetitive elements removed (Sibley and Ahlquist 1987). Whatever measure is used, however, as long as the same measurement is used consistently, will show that humans are more closely related to chimpanzees (including the bonobo, sister species to the common chimpanzee) than to any other species.
   
   Note also, though, that evolution has not been uniform throughout the genomes, so estimates of human-chimp divergence which consider only part of the genome can give different results (Britten 2002, Chen et al. 2001).

References:​

1. Britten, Roy J. 2002. Divergence between samples of chimpanzee and human DNA sequences is 5% counting indels. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 99: 13633-13635.
2. Chen, F.-C., E. J. Vallender, H. Wang, C.-S. Tzeng, and W.-H. Li. 2001. Genomic divergence between human and chimpanzee estimated from large-scale alignments of genomic sequences. Journal of Heredity 92(6): 481-489.
3. Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium. 2005. Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome. Nature 437: 69-87.
4. Sibley, C. G. and J. E. Ahlquist. 1987. DNA hybridization evidence of hominid phylogeny: Results from an expanded data set. Journal of Molecular Evolution 26: 99-121.

 

[ding]

Contrary to what you might read from some IDIOT KWEATIOIST Website...
(Like ICR/Institute for Creation Research recently posted here.)
this is a SIMPLE one and a BIGGIE.
Easy to understand/SEE.
We have 23 pairs of Chromos, ALL GREAT Apes 24.
Their 2 a/b fused into our #2 as can be easily seen when put next to one another.

​

Introduction​

​

All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.​

​

The Evidence​

​

Evidence for fusing of two ancestral chromosomes to create human chromosome 2 and where there has been no fusion in other Great Apes is:​

​

1) The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2. (1)​

​

2) The remains of the sequence that the chromosome has on its ends (the telomere) is found in the middle of human chromosome 2 where the ancestral chromosomes fused. (2)​

​

3) the detail of this region (pre-telomeric sequence, telomeric sequence, reversed telomeric sequence, pre-telomeric sequence) is exactly what we would expect from a fusion. (3)[/B]​

​

4) this telomeric region is Exactly where one would expect to find it if a fusion had occurred in the middle of human chromosome 2.​

​

5) the centromere of human chromosome 2 Lines up with the chimp chromosome 2p chromosomal centromere.​

​

6) At the place where we would expect it on the human chromosome we find the Remnants of the chimp 2q centromere (4).​

​

Not only is this Strong evidence for a fusion event, but it is also strong evidence for Common ancestry; in fact, it is hard to explain by any other mechanism.​

​

​

​

Explanations​

​

Telomere evidence​

​

The telomere is a sequence of DNA at the end of the chromosome. The function of the telomere is to protect the ends of the chromosomal DNA strands during replication. The ends of the strands are very vulnerable to mutations or deletions. Telomeres consist of, or contain long stretches of simple DNA sequences that are repeated many times. The telomeres tend to be shortened over time and are restored by an enzyme called telomerase which lengthens the sequence. If the telomere becomes too short in somatic cells, errors in duplication can occur leading to cancers.​

​

The telomere sequence is highly conserved in different groups of organisms. For example vertebrates have the sequence TTAGGG repeated many times. (In primates the sequence is repeated 500 to 3500 times). Adjacent to the telomere, are regions with other DNA repeats (known as Telomere Associated Repeats) but these regions, rather than being highly conserved, are highly polymorphic - that is they have many variations even within the same species. Nevertheless the pretelomeric region can be easily recognised in closely related species. Occasionally genes are found in the pretelomeric region.​

​

Now these telomeric and pretelomeric sequences are normally found only on chromosome ends. However, in human chromosome 2, there is strong evidence for chromosome fusing in that there is a pretelomeric sequence, a telomeric sequence, an inverted telomeric sequence and an inverted pretelomeric sequence in that order in the middle of the chromosome.​

​

​

Centromere evidence​

​

Turning now to the centromere. The process of somatic cell division (mitosis) is as follows (this is a very brief and simplified summary to explain the centromere):​

[.............]​

​

[.............]​

​

​

Chromosome fusion

Demonstration that human chromosome 2 is the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes

www.evolutionpages.com

So genetic mutation rather than natural selection?

 

[abu afak]

So genetic mutation rather than natural selection?

non sequitur question.
Nature can and does select from among the many millions of mutations.
It's a trial-and-[literally]-error process. Evo!
Whatever new traits work best for current conditions, continue/multiply. Most fail unnoticed.
And of course ongoing. So many wrongly think 'we' (as is) are not only the top, but end game of evo.
`

 

[ding]

non sequitur question.
Nature can and does select from among the many millions of mutations.
It's a trial-and-[literally]-error process. Evo!
Whatever new traits work best for current conditions, continue/multiply. Most fail unnoticed.
And of course ongoing. So many wrongly think 'we' (as is) are not only the top, but end game of evo.
`

I am just confirming that you believe this was a genetic mutation and not natural selection, ok? Well do you?

 

[ding]

So much for natural selection when it comes to speciation.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Still one of the cooler discoveries in all of biology...

 

[ding]

Darwin got so many things wrong.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

A childs life? Don't you mean zygote?

A STAGE in the development of a HUMAN life you idiot

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Either that, or it's an attempt to understand and explain how "God" did it. LOL

I was gonna say space aliens did it. They're more likely to accept that. Baby steps

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Is this another thing that points to evolution and to be denied by those who believe in god.

"God"

"a god" "the God"

Do you atheists understand basic grammar?

 

[abu afak]

I am just confirming that you believe this was a genetic mutation and not natural selection, ok? Well do you?

Again, that's a non sequitur that shows you know Nothing about evo. (as well as being a troll)
I mean nothing Designer guy.
The two are not only Not mutually exclusive, but there can't be any Natural selection (as opposed to Your Fundie 'designed') without a wide number of mutations enabling current conditions to favor the better ones and let the non-survivability-advantaged ones slip away.

`

 

[ding]

Again, that's a non sequitur that shows you know Nothing about evo. (as well as being a troll)
I mean nothing Designer guy.
The two are not only Not mutually exclusive, but there can't be any Natural selection (as opposed to Your Fundie 'designed') without a wide number of mutations enabling current conditions to favor the better ones and let the non-survivability-advantaged ones slip away.

`

All I asked was do you believe the fusing of chromosomes was a product of a genetic mutation or natural selection.

Do you believe if Darwin had known about genes he might have rethought his theory?

 

[abu afak]

"God"

"a god" "the God"

Do you atheists understand basic grammar?

When most theists here post they say 'god' (a god) but they are really only talking about their (the god).
They in fact reject all the other ones.
`

 

[Colin norris]

Contrary to what you might read from some IDIOT KWEATIOIST Website...
(Like ICR/Institute for Creation Research recently posted here.)
this is a SIMPLE one and a BIGGIE.
Easy to understand/SEE.
We have 23 pairs of Chromos, ALL GREAT Apes 24.
Their 2 a/b fused into our #2 as can be easily seen when put next to one another.

​

Introduction​

​

All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.​

​

The Evidence​

​

Evidence for fusing of two ancestral chromosomes to create human chromosome 2 and where there has been no fusion in other Great Apes is:​

​

1) The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2. (1)​

​

2) The remains of the sequence that the chromosome has on its ends (the telomere) is found in the middle of human chromosome 2 where the ancestral chromosomes fused. (2)​

​

3) the detail of this region (pre-telomeric sequence, telomeric sequence, reversed telomeric sequence, pre-telomeric sequence) is exactly what we would expect from a fusion. (3)[/B]​

​

4) this telomeric region is Exactly where one would expect to find it if a fusion had occurred in the middle of human chromosome 2.​

​

5) the centromere of human chromosome 2 Lines up with the chimp chromosome 2p chromosomal centromere.​

​

6) At the place where we would expect it on the human chromosome we find the Remnants of the chimp 2q centromere (4).​

​

Not only is this Strong evidence for a fusion event, but it is also strong evidence for Common ancestry; in fact, it is hard to explain by any other mechanism.​

​

​

​

Explanations​

​

Telomere evidence​

​

The telomere is a sequence of DNA at the end of the chromosome. The function of the telomere is to protect the ends of the chromosomal DNA strands during replication. The ends of the strands are very vulnerable to mutations or deletions. Telomeres consist of, or contain long stretches of simple DNA sequences that are repeated many times. The telomeres tend to be shortened over time and are restored by an enzyme called telomerase which lengthens the sequence. If the telomere becomes too short in somatic cells, errors in duplication can occur leading to cancers.​

​

The telomere sequence is highly conserved in different groups of organisms. For example vertebrates have the sequence TTAGGG repeated many times. (In primates the sequence is repeated 500 to 3500 times). Adjacent to the telomere, are regions with other DNA repeats (known as Telomere Associated Repeats) but these regions, rather than being highly conserved, are highly polymorphic - that is they have many variations even within the same species. Nevertheless the pretelomeric region can be easily recognised in closely related species. Occasionally genes are found in the pretelomeric region.​

​

Now these telomeric and pretelomeric sequences are normally found only on chromosome ends. However, in human chromosome 2, there is strong evidence for chromosome fusing in that there is a pretelomeric sequence, a telomeric sequence, an inverted telomeric sequence and an inverted pretelomeric sequence in that order in the middle of the chromosome.​

​

​

Centromere evidence​

​

Turning now to the centromere. The process of somatic cell division (mitosis) is as follows (this is a very brief and simplified summary to explain the centromere):​

[.............]​

​

[.............]​

​

​

Chromosome fusion

Demonstration that human chromosome 2 is the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes

www.evolutionpages.com

Th e ones with less chromosomes are regarded as republicans.
They gave primate I tellivence and spent their life scratching the head and nuts.

 

[Cougarbear]

So basically, you provided no defendable evidence. Using charlatans at extremist ministries is really just a joke because we both know that creation ministries do no research and publish in no peer reviewed literature.

let’s not pretend that the charlatans at ICR are either honest or credible. I note that the ICR charlatans identify “… previously published secular reports”.

Is there a difference between fundamentalist Christian reports and secular evilutionist atheist reports?

Let’s examine the objective standards of extremist Christian ministries.

Principles of Biblical Creationism​

Foundational Principles

www.icr.org

The Creator of the universe is a triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There is only one eternal and transcendent God, the source of all being and meaning, and He exists in three Persons, each of whom participated in the work of creation.

• The Bible, consisting of the 39 canonical books of the Old Testament and the 27 canonical books of the New Testament, is the divinely inspired revelation of the Creator to man. Its unique, plenary, verbal inspiration guarantees that these writings, as originally and miraculously given, are infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.
• All things in the universe were created and made by God in the six literal days of the creation week described in Genesis 1:1–2:3, and confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual, historical, and perspicuous; thus, all theories of origins or development that involve evolution in any form are false. All things that now exist are sustained and ordered by God’s providential care. However, a part of the spiritual creation, Satan and his angels, rebelled against God after the creation and are attempting to thwart His divine purposes in creation.

On the other hand, I will give you peer reviewed data that remarkably has a list of references, admittedly to evilutionist atheist science sources:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science
Journal of Heredity
Nature
Journal of Molecular Evolution

Gee, whiz. I guess science got nuthin’ on Jimmy Swaggert.

CB144: Human/chimp genome difference

1. The difference between chimpanzees and humans due to single-nucleotide substitutions averages 1.23 percent, of which 1.06 percent or less is due to fixed divergence, and the rest being a result of polymorphism within chimp populations and within human populations. Insertion and deletion (indel) events account for another approximately 3 percent difference between chimp and human sequences, but each indel typically involves multiple nucleotides. The number of genetic changes from indels is a fraction of the number of single-nucleotide substitutions (roughly 5 million compared with roughly 35 million). So describing humans and chimpanzees as 98 to 99 percent identical is entirely appropriate (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005).
   
   
2. The difference measurement depends on what you are measuring. If you measure the number of proteins for which the entire protein is identical in the two species, humans and chimpanzees are 29 percent identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005). If you measure nonsynonymous base pair differences within protein coding regions, humans and chimps are 99.75 percent identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005, fig. 9). The original 98.4 percent estimate came from DNA hybridization experiments, which measured (indirectly, via DNA melting temperature) sequence difference among short segments of the genomes that are similar enough to hybridize but with repetitive elements removed (Sibley and Ahlquist 1987). Whatever measure is used, however, as long as the same measurement is used consistently, will show that humans are more closely related to chimpanzees (including the bonobo, sister species to the common chimpanzee) than to any other species.
   
   Note also, though, that evolution has not been uniform throughout the genomes, so estimates of human-chimp divergence which consider only part of the genome can give different results (Britten 2002, Chen et al. 2001).

References:​

1. Britten, Roy J. 2002. Divergence between samples of chimpanzee and human DNA sequences is 5% counting indels. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 99: 13633-13635.
2. Chen, F.-C., E. J. Vallender, H. Wang, C.-S. Tzeng, and W.-H. Li. 2001. Genomic divergence between human and chimpanzee estimated from large-scale alignments of genomic sequences. Journal of Heredity 92(6): 481-489.
3. Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium. 2005. Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome. Nature 437: 69-87.
4. Sibley, C. G. and J. E. Ahlquist. 1987. DNA hybridization evidence of hominid phylogeny: Results from an expanded data set. Journal of Molecular Evolution 26: 99-121.

It's your claim that these Phd's are charlatans. What proof do you have of this? Forget about them being religious. The information comes from studies done by evolutionists. It's not their work. It's yours! You are being hanged by your own works. What creationists have uncovered is the sick attempts to hide the truth by ignoring scientific findings that hurt evolution's claims that we are almost chimps.

 

[abu afak]

It's your claim that these Phd's are charlatans. What proof do you have of this? Forget about them being religious. The information comes from studies done by evolutionists. It's not their work. It's yours! You are being hanged by your own works. What creationists have uncovered is the sick attempts to hide the truth by ignoring scientific findings that hurt evolution's claims that we are almost chimps.

Your source in great majority disagrees with You lunatic boy!
Only one cherry picked/hyper-specific number agrees.
WTF!

​

CB144: Human/chimp genome difference​

1. ""The difference between chimpanzees and humans due to single-nucleotide substitutions averages 1.23%, of which 1.06% or less is due to fixed divergence, and the rest being a result of polymorphism within chimp populations and within human populations. Insertion and deletion (indel) events account for another approximately 3% difference between chimp and human sequences, but each indel typically involves multiple nucleotides. The number of genetic changes from indels is a fraction of the number of single-nucleotide substitutions (roughly 5 million compared with roughly 35 million). So describing humans and chimpanzees as 98% to 99% identical is entirely appropriate (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005).
   
   
   
2. The difference measurement depends on what you are measuring. If you measure the number of proteins for which the entire protein is identical in the two species, humans and chimpanzees are 29% identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005). If you measure nonsynonymous base pair differences within protein coding regions, humans and chimps are 99.75% identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005, fig. 9). The original 98.4% estimate came from DNA hybridization experiments, which measured (indirectly, via DNA melting temperature) sequence difference among short segments of the genomes that are similar enough to hybridize but with repetitive elements removed (Sibley and Ahlquist 1987). Whatever measure is used, however, as long as the same measurement is used consistently, will show that humans are more closely related to chimpanzees (including the bonobo, sister species to the common chimpanzee) than to any other species.
   
   Note also, though, that evolution has not been uniform throughout the genomes, so estimates of human-chimp divergence which consider only part of the genome can give different results (Britten 2002, Chen et al. 2001).""

And that's hardly the only one.
The VAST majority scientific literature (PhDs galore) will give you 98-99% similar.

`

 

[Cougarbear]

Your source in great majority disagrees with You lunatic boy!
Only one cherry picked/hyper-specific number agrees.
WTF!

​

CB144: Human/chimp genome difference​

1. The difference between chimpanzees and humans due to single-nucleotide substitutions averages 1.23%, of which 1.06% or less is due to fixed divergence, and the rest being a result of polymorphism within chimp populations and within human populations. Insertion and deletion (indel) events account for another approximately 3% difference between chimp and human sequences, but each indel typically involves multiple nucleotides. The number of genetic changes from indels is a fraction of the number of single-nucleotide substitutions (roughly 5 million compared with roughly 35 million). So describing humans and chimpanzees as 98% to 99% identical is entirely appropriate (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005).
   
   
   
2. The difference measurement depends on what you are measuring. If you measure the number of proteins for which the entire protein is identical in the two species, humans and chimpanzees are 29% identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005). If you measure nonsynonymous base pair differences within protein coding regions, humans and chimps are 99.75% identical (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005, fig. 9). The original 98.4% estimate came from DNA hybridization experiments, which measured (indirectly, via DNA melting temperature) sequence difference among short segments of the genomes that are similar enough to hybridize but with repetitive elements removed (Sibley and Ahlquist 1987). Whatever measure is used, however, as long as the same measurement is used consistently, will show that humans are more closely related to chimpanzees (including the bonobo, sister species to the common chimpanzee) than to any other species.
   
   Note also, though, that evolution has not been uniform throughout the genomes, so estimates of human-chimp divergence which consider only part of the genome can give different results (Britten 2002, Chen et al. 2001).[/B]

And that's hardly the only one.
The VAST majority scientific literature (PhDs galore) will give you 98-99% similar.

`

Using old crap won't make it smell any better. That has been debunked even by evolutionist scientists as well. If it were not so, we would still look very much like chimps. We would not have white irises and we would still have a tail. Well, maybe you still have a tail

 

[abu afak]

Using old crap won't make it smell any better. That has been debunked even by evolutionist scientists as well. If it were not so, we would still look very much like chimps. We would not have white irises and we would still have a tail. Well, maybe you still have a tail

I used YOUR Source and only YOUR excerpt Whack Job!
It DISAGREES with you.
Wow. Haysoos blind.

​

""So describing humans and chimpanzees as 98% to 99% identical is entirely appropriate (Chimpanzee Sequencing 2005).""​

​

`​