The myth of 1%

[wordy80]

Apparently a human and chimps DNA is not a 1% difference but could be up to 30% different. What are the implications of this for evolution?

Illustrating how wrong this is, in 2012 Drs Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman reviewed the published studies comparing human and chimp DNA.5 When all the DNA is taken into account and not just pre-selected parts, they found,

“it is safe to conclude that human-chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%.”
In other words, the differences are huge, possibly greater than 19%. Indeed, Dr Tomkins made his own thorough comparison and found the difference to be ~30%.6 Also, the Y-chromosomes, found only in males, are radically different, contrary to evolutionists’ expectations.7

 

[Eddi]

What are the implications of this for evolution?

none?

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Apparently a human and chimps DNA is not a 1% difference but could be up to 30% different. What are the implications of this for evolution?

Illustrating how wrong this is, in 2012 Drs Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman reviewed the published studies comparing human and chimp DNA.5 When all the DNA is taken into account and not just pre-selected parts, they found,

“it is safe to conclude that human-chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%.”
In other words, the differences are huge, possibly greater than 19%. Indeed, Dr Tomkins made his own thorough comparison and found the difference to be ~30%.6 Also, the Y-chromosomes, found only in males, are radically different, contrary to evolutionists’ expectations.7

You seem to be off by a factor of 10. It is accepted that the difference between human and chimpanzee DNA is in the range of roughly 3%. The key is that point mutations (functional protein production) make up roughly 1.23% of the difference between chimpanzees and humans, while expression of genes ( i.e. non-coding regions) make up roughly 3% difference … not 30% as you claimed. Beyond that there are inversions and translocations. However, these two processes do not result in different proteins being produced by the genome, Since protein transcription is unaffected.

Also, please note when you wish to discuss science, you should really back up any claim with research paper(s) supporting your statements. Otherwise, the poster just seems to be making up stuff.


Differences between human and chimpanzee genomes and their implications in gene expression, protein functions and biochemical properties of the two species - BMC Genomics

“In early works, divergence of human and chimpanzee genomes was estimated as roughly 1% [6]. This estimate was based on the comparison of protein-coding sequences and didn’t consider non-coding (major) part of DNA. However, the idea of ~ 99% similarity of genomes persisted for a long time, until 2005 when nearly complete initial sequencing results of both human [7] and chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) [8] genomes became available. It was found that genome differences represented by single nucleotide alterations formed 1.23% of human DNA, whereas larger deletions and insertions constituted ~ 3% of our genome “


So trying to compare human and chimpanzee DNA and noting that larger sections have been inverted, or transcribed, could be likened to finding a full set of old-fashioned encyclopedia’s in one room of a house, that describe how to make a human being.
But then, in a different room, you find another full set of encyclopedias on how to make a chimpanzee. Throughout the millions of words of text, there are a few punctuation changes and several dozen words misspelled in the chimpanzee encyclopedias. Otherwise everything else is identical.
To claim that there’s a 30% difference, thus proving these are completely different animals, would be like somebody saying, “But look! The chimp encyclopedias covering F-to-L, and T-to-W are upside down!!”


.







.




.

 

[siti]

Why do creationists feel such a keen urge to distance themselves from their evolutionary cousins I wonder?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Apparently a human and chimps DNA is not a 1% difference but could be up to 30% different. What are the implications of this for evolution?

Illustrating how wrong this is, in 2012 Drs Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman reviewed the published studies comparing human and chimp DNA.5 When all the DNA is taken into account and not just pre-selected parts, they found,

“it is safe to conclude that human-chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%.”
In other words, the differences are huge, possibly greater than 19%. Indeed, Dr Tomkins made his own thorough comparison and found the difference to be ~30%.6 Also, the Y-chromosomes, found only in males, are radically different, contrary to evolutionists’ expectations.7

Two colossal quacks....

Dr Jeffrey Tomkins

Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.

creation.com

Dr Jerry Bergman

Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.

creation.com

Published in a colossal quack creation science journal.

No wonder you didn't include links.

God have mercy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Apparently a human and chimps DNA is not a 1% difference but could be up to 30% different. What are the implications of this for evolution?

Illustrating how wrong this is, in 2012 Drs Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman reviewed the published studies comparing human and chimp DNA.5 When all the DNA is taken into account and not just pre-selected parts, they found,

“it is safe to conclude that human-chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%.”
In other words, the differences are huge, possibly greater than 19%. Indeed, Dr Tomkins made his own thorough comparison and found the difference to be ~30%.6 Also, the Y-chromosomes, found only in males, are radically different, contrary to evolutionists’ expectations.7

Try to find a valid source. These are not scientists, they are creationists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I knew the name rang a bell. If you want a technical refutation here is a three hour long video by a PhD candidate whose specialty is human evolution you can watch this:

The reason that no one bothers to refute this idiocy in peer reviewed papers is because this nonsense was not peer reviewed. It would have fail ten times over.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Apparently a human and chimps DNA is not a 1% difference but could be up to 30% different. What are the implications of this for evolution?

Illustrating how wrong this is, in 2012 Drs Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman reviewed the published studies comparing human and chimp DNA.5 When all the DNA is taken into account and not just pre-selected parts, they found,

“it is safe to conclude that human-chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%.”
In other words, the differences are huge, possibly greater than 19%. Indeed, Dr Tomkins made his own thorough comparison and found the difference to be ~30%.6 Also, the Y-chromosomes, found only in males, are radically different, contrary to evolutionists’ expectations.7

There is an a big list of these failed arguments that get posted on a cyclical rotation about every 6 months or a year.

1. Not peer reviewed research.
2. Used the wrong method.
3. Apparently used the wrong method incorrectly, since others have not been able to repeat his results.

The difference between human and chimp genomes remains between 1-4%.

What is next on the list besides the brains behind natural selection?

 

[YoursTrue]

There is an a big list of these failed arguments that get posted on a cyclical rotation about every 6 months or a year.

1. Not peer reviewed research.
2. Used the wrong method.
3. Apparently used the wrong method incorrectly, since others have not been able to repeat his results.

The difference between human and chimp genomes remains between 1-4%.

What is next on the list besides the brains behind natural selection?

Just that little difference apparently means that chimps do not have written history of themselves, written by themselves. Just a few little percentage. There's an old song called, "What a Difference a Percent Makes..." And don't forget hospitals. They don't built hospitals.

 

[YoursTrue]

There is an a big list of these failed arguments that get posted on a cyclical rotation about every 6 months or a year.

1. Not peer reviewed research.
2. Used the wrong method.
3. Apparently used the wrong method incorrectly, since others have not been able to repeat his results.

The difference between human and chimp genomes remains between 1-4%.

What is next on the list besides the brains behind natural selection?

They selected not to write their history and selection naturally.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Just that little difference apparently means that chimps do not have written history of themselves, written by themselves. Just a few little percentage. There's an old song called, "What a Difference a Percent Makes..." And don't forget hospitals. They don't built hospitals.

Believe whatever you want.

They also say you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They selected not to write their history and selection naturally.

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. You have a wonderful rest of your day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just that little difference apparently means that chimps do not have written history of themselves, written by themselves. Just a few little percentage. There's an old song called, "What a Difference a Percent Makes..." And don't forget hospitals. They don't built hospitals.

Yes, and so what? For over 90% of our history we did not have a written history.

 

[Heyo]

Yes, and so what? For over 90% of our history we did not have a written history.

Make that 98%. Homo sapiens exists for 200,000 years (conservative estimate). Writing exists for about 4,000 years.

 

[Valjean]

Just that little difference apparently means that chimps do not have written history of themselves, written by themselves. Just a few little percentage. There's an old song called, "What a Difference a Percent Makes..." And don't forget hospitals. They don't built hospitals.

None of this has any relevance I can see, to the subject at hand.

 

[Valjean]

Just that little difference apparently means that chimps do not have written history of themselves, written by themselves. Just a few little percentage. There's an old song called, "What a Difference a Percent Makes..." And don't forget hospitals. They don't built hospitals.

Keep in mind, humans didn't have writing, or hospitals, for 99% of our whole history, despite our human genomes. So why do you conclude that it was our genetics or brains responsible for our recent technological spurt?
If we were technologically the same as modern chimps for most of our history, maybe the recent advances are more a cultural or historical fluke than a direct result of our genes.

 

[Valjean]

Why do creationists feel such a keen urge to distance themselves from their evolutionary cousins I wonder?

We're the crown of creation, the paragon of animals, beloved of God.
Evolution undermines our status. We're very insecure....

 

[exchemist]

Why do creationists feel such a keen urge to distance themselves from their evolutionary cousins I wonder?

Er..........

 

[exchemist]

Try to find a valid source. These are not scientists, they are creationists.

Quite.

Tomkins seems to be a prof at something called "Liberty University", which apparently is an evangelical outfit with little or no academic credibility, ranked 395-435 out of US colleges: https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/liberty-university-10392

Jerry Bergman got his doctorate from a non-accredited correspondence school, a.k.a. diploma mill, and was once sacked (from some university nobody has heard of) for lying about having psychology credentials, which he did not: Jerry Bergman

From a science point of view, these people are pretty worthless.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just that little difference apparently means that chimps do not have written history of themselves, written by themselves. Just a few little percentage. There's an old song called, "What a Difference a Percent Makes..." And don't forget hospitals. They don't built hospitals.

Another "so what" argument