Monkey is 10% similar to human

[questfortruth]

In 2020 AD schools classes they continue to say that the similarity in the DNA of chimpanzees and humans is 98.5%. But in 2010 they found that similarity ranges in different DNA segments from 10 to 98.5 percent, with a total similarity of less than 70 %,

why are they lying to us? And where are they lying? In the top journal or at school?

Hughes, J., Skaletsky, H., Pyntikova, T. et al. Chimpanzee and human Y chromosomes are remarkably divergent in structure and gene content. Nature 463, 536–539 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08700

If the sum of genetic difference between most primitive and sick female chimpanzee Dina and me - a healthy male person, does not exceed two point five percent, then what total difference have two beings according to DNA: Adolf Hitler and Mother Theresa? Just some 0.00000001 %? Please remember, that the two are of different sex, and they look very different.

Why then Hitler is Absolute Monster, and mother Theresa - Absolute Saint, if the genetic difference between their organisms is less than 0.1%? Because immortal souls exist. Their inner souls are perfectly 100% percent different from each other. Therefore, God exists, He is Spirit of Saints. And satan is there, he is the spirit of sinners.

This is not stressed in the school textbooks. There is just sentence "human DNA has 98.5 similarities with monkeys", however, the correct one is:
"some parts of DNA have only 10 % similarity, the Y-Chromosome has less than 70% similarity, but the total similarity is 98.5%."

Reviewer: "Quantum mechanics is hardly mentioned in the school textbooks... even though it has replaced Newtonian mechanics 100 years ago. How about General Relativity? How well is it covered in school textbooks?"

Me: It is not rocket science to say "some parts of DNA are similar only to 10%."

See the world more positive, Quest For Truth: they are not lying, they are wishful thinking.

With all love, but it is fact: there are segments in DNA, that have only 10% similarity between human and monkey.

Reviewer: "So if I had two books that were overall 98% identical, but on page 396, the 12th sentence down from the top was only 10% identical, what does that prove?"

There was a huge fight in every state over equal time for teaching Evolution and Bible.
Certainly, it is good, that Science is afraid of the Bible.
If it would not be afraid, it would have left a story of Creation at least one tiny chance.

Reviewer: "It would be better to mention that in most places the similarity is 100%, wouldn't it?"
Me:
Are we in a war for sanity or something?

Reviewer: "Has it ever occurred to you to look at the basis of your logic, reasoning, and understanding? Since your ideas apparently run into opposition here and with journal reviewers, perhaps it is you that needs to change and not the rest of the world."

Me: "I have accepted Lord Jesus as my healer. The outside population dislikes
Him and thinks His words are crazy: ``And when His friends heard of it,
they went out to lay hold on Him: for they said, He is beside Himself.''
Mark 3:21. It is not necessarily true in my case because I am not running amok.
Please recall that I have publications in some top journals. Do I have
to give you the references? So, I suggest you enjoy my unusual
brain pattern. Nobody involved has expressed regret for murdering my Lord.
The world needs some positive change, in my opinion, not so much me."

 

[exchemist]

In 2020 AD schools classes they continue to say that the similarity in the DNA of chimpanzees and humans is 98.5%. But in 2010 they found that similarity ranges in different DNA segments from 10 to 98.5 percent, with a total similarity of less than 70 %,

why are they lying to us? And where are they lying? In the top journal or at school?

Hughes, J., Skaletsky, H., Pyntikova, T. et al. Chimpanzee and human Y chromosomes are remarkably divergent in structure and gene content. Nature 463, 536–539 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08700

See the world more positive, Quest For Truth: they are not lying, they are wishful thinking.

No it is you that is misguided. Nobody is lying - except possibly you.

The link you refer to is about comparing the Y chromosome only.

The latest DNA comparison I have been able to find was done in 2005 and indicates that Man shares about 96% of DNA sequences with chimpanzees: Our DNA is 99.9% the same as the person next to us — and we're surprisingly similar to a lot of other living things

 

[questfortruth]

No it is you that is misguided. Nobody is lying - except possibly you.

The link you refer to is about comparing the Y chromosome only.

The latest DNA comparison I have been able to find was done in 2005 and indicates that Man shares about 96% of DNA sequences with chimpanzees: Our DNA is 99.9% the same as the person next to us — and we're surprisingly similar to a lot of other living things

But if the similarity is less than 70% indeed, God is there? I mean, there is nothing settled in Research.
The similarity can be just 10% after some careful research.

 

[Mock Turtle]

In 2020 AD schools classes they continue to say that the similarity in the DNA of chimpanzees and humans is 98.5%. But in 2010 they found that similarity ranges in different DNA segments from 10 to 98.5 percent, with a total similarity of less than 70 %,

why are they lying to us? And where are they lying? In the top journal or at school?

Hughes, J., Skaletsky, H., Pyntikova, T. et al. Chimpanzee and human Y chromosomes are remarkably divergent in structure and gene content. Nature 463, 536–539 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08700

See the world more positive, Quest For Truth: they are not lying, they are wishful thinking.

Are you impugning my ancestors!

How do you explain this - likely to see such in most other species, and where it can't just be laughed off?

 

[questfortruth]

No it is you that is misguided. Nobody is lying - except possibly you.

The link you refer to is about comparing the Y chromosome only.

With all love, but it is fact: there are segments in DNA, that have only 10% similarity between human and monkey.

 

[questfortruth]

Are you impugning my ancestors!

How do you explain this - likely to see such in most other species, and where it can't just be laughed off?

The animals are not bio-robots, because they have mortal souls.

 

[Mock Turtle]

The animals are not bio-robots, because they have mortal souls.

You do realise what kind of understanding it takes for an Orangutan to get a joke presumably.

 

[sayak83]

But if the similarity is less than 70% indeed, God is there? I mean, there is nothing settled in Research.
The similarity can be just 10% after some careful research.

And (many more) segments with 100% similarity... do that the total similarity is about 98%. There is nothing new about this (for us scientists at least). I am hoping there is a point to this. The Y chromosome is well know to change much more rapidly than other parts of the DNA for all animals. We know this for many decades now.
Males Mutate More Than Females

 

[questfortruth]

And (many more) segments with 100% similarity... do that the total similarity is about 98%. There is nothing new about this (for us scientists at least). I am hoping there is a point to this. The Y chromosome is well know to change much more rapidly than other parts of the DNA for all animals. We know this for many decades now.
Males Mutate More Than Females

This is not stressed in the school textbooks. There is just sentence "human DNA has 98.5 similarities with monkeys", however, the correct one is:
"some parts of DNA have only 10 % similarity, the Y-Chromosome has less than 70% similarity, but the total similarity is 98.5%."

 

[sayak83]

This is not stressed in the school textbooks. There is just sentence "human DNA has 98.5 similarities with monkeys", however, the correct one is:
"some parts of DNA have only 10 % similarity, the Y-Chromosome has less than 70% similarity, but the total similarity is 98.5%."

Quantum mechanics is hardly mentioned in the school text books... even though it has replaced Newtonian mechanics 100 years ago.. How about General Relavity? How well is it covered in school text books?
School textbooks are there to give a broad rough picture of the science in a highly simplified treatment. It's not meant to provide details that young children do not have the skills to understand. Graduate textbooks on evolutionary genetics cover such things

 

[questfortruth]

Quantum mechanics is hardly mentioned in the school text books... even though it has replaced Newtonian mechanics 100 years ago.. How about General Relavity? How well is it covered in school text books?

It is not rocket science to say "some parts of DNA are similar only to 10%."

 

[Nimos]

This is not stressed in the school textbooks. There is just sentence "human DNA has 98.5 similarities with monkeys", however, the correct one is:
"some parts of DNA have only 10 % similarity, the Y-Chromosome has less than 70% similarity, but the total similarity is 98.5%."

I don't think you look at this correctly, not claiming to know a lot about these things. But you seem to look at it like one would look at an apple and an orange. Like they are both round, grow on trees etc. therefore when someone say that they are 95% identical for example, it would mean that we could hardly tell them apart.

That is not really a way to go about it, because you are working with very few points of measurement or what to say, like them both being round, being one. But that is not how it works in reality, when they decide the similarity between species, from what I understand.

If you take a human for instance, we have around 724 trillion cells, by which a lot of them contains DNA, in fact each cell contains around 3 billion pairs. So even 1 or 2% difference in those billions pairs multiplied by the 724 trillion cells is a huge amount of differences. Which is why you can't directly determine how closely related two similar looking species are, simply by looking at how many legs, eyes and if they sort of look the same etc. like a cat and dog. However what you can do, from this is to draw the conclusion, that is it probably more likely that cats and dogs are closer related to each other than a butterfly and a dog is.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This is not stressed in the school textbooks. There is just sentence "human DNA has 98.5 similarities with monkeys", however, the correct one is:
"some parts of DNA have only 10 % similarity, the Y-Chromosome has less than 70% similarity, but the total similarity is 98.5%."

And what, exactly, does that prove in your strange world-view?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Reviewer: "Quantum mechanics is hardly mentioned in the school textbooks... even though it has replaced Newtonian mechanics 100 years ago. How about General Relativity? How well is it covered in school textbooks?"

Me: It is not rocket science to say "some parts of DNA are similar only to 10%."

In school textbooks (if you are referring to schools below the University graduate level) Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity are mentioned but not taught. They are advanced topics for advanced educational institutions.

And in any case, both Newtonian mechanics and classical physics work perfectly well at the scale that we humans typically operate. The equations hold very nicely at non-relativistic speeds and gravity.

Incidentally, on the subject of "rocket science," classical physics is still all you need to land a vehicle on Mars -- or Pluto, for that matter.

 

[fantome profane]

With all love, but it is fact: there are segments in DNA, that have only 10% similarity between human and monkey.

Some segments? So what?

So if I had two books that were overall 98% identical, but on page 396, the 12th sentence down from the top was only 10% identical, what does that prove?

I guess that proves God wrote both books obviously.

 

[ChristineM]

It is not rocket science to say "some parts of DNA are similar only to 10%."

It is not rocket science to give a average. Tell me do you have the percentage of DNA with only a 10% similarly? Do you have the details of those segments with only 10% similarity? To mention it in schoolbl books i wotld suggest far more detail explaining the difference for each segment which surpasses rocket science Or of course just teach the average and learn the heavy stuff at uni, supposing you want to persue genetics as a career.

I could quite easily cherry pick a specific tiny fraction of my DNA and compare it with the same strand in any of my children and find way less than 10% similarity. And the point would be what?

 

[questfortruth]

So if I had two books that were overall 98% identical, but on page 396, the 12th sentence down from the top was only 10% identical, what does that prove?

There was a huge fight in every state over equal time for teaching Evolution and Bible.
Certainly, it is good, that Science is afraid of the Bible.
If it would not be afraid, it would have left a story of Creation at least one tiny chance.

 

[questfortruth]

what?

It was suggested by well-meaning persons, that many genius men were sick with a mentality: "And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself." Mark 3:21. It is not necessarily true in my case, because I am not running amok. So, I suggest you enjoy my unusual brain circle pattern.

 

[sayak83]

It is not rocket science to say "some parts of DNA are similar only to 10%."

Very very few parts. By simple statistics, if there is 98.5% similarilty, number places where similarity drops to 10% are negligible. Not seeing the point of mentioning it in high school books. It would be better to mention that in most places the similarity is 100%, wouldn't it?

Though it would be interesting to mention the rapidly diverging regions if space permitted, as evolutionary processes are most apparent in these places.

 

[questfortruth]

It would be better to mention that in most places the similarity is 100%, wouldn't it?

Are we in a war for sanity or something?

There was a huge fight in every state over equal time for teaching Evolution and Bible.
Certainly, it is good, that Science is afraid of the Bible.
If it would not be afraid, it would have left a story of Creation at least one tiny chance.