We've all heard it before, chimpanzees and humans share 99% of their DNA so that means Bonzo is our closest living relative in the animal kingdom. Score one for evolution, right? So what if the whole theory of evolution is backed up with fraud and lies, comparing DNA is science and science is based on truth and integrity, right?
For example Carbon 14 dating is science. Carbon 14 is a naturally occurring radioactive isotope of common carbon that is created in the upper atmosphere and is absorbed by plants, animals eat those plants and absorb the carbon 14. when a plant dies it stops absorbing Carbon 14, and when an animal dies it stops absorbing plants. Since Carbon 14 has a known decay rate we can determine mathematically by seeing how much Carbon 14 is remaining in an object when a tree which has been converted to an Egyptian mummy case or when the mummy inside stopped eating salad.
Carbon 14 dating has been in use for dating organic material since WWII, and since Carbon 14 decays, the oldest objects that can be accurately dated by this method are 50,000 years old. Maybe 100,000 years tops because Carbon 14 will decay away in 100,000 years. However when things "known" to be millions of years old, things like coal and carboniferous portions of dinosaur fossils, are tested for Carbon 14, Carbon 14 is found. Science is at a loss for words but it's obviously a problem with Carbon 14, it can't be a young earth, right? And that kind of thing can't happen with DNA testing, right?
Not so fast Monkeyboy. While evangelical evolutionists claim a 99% match between chimpanzee and human DNA, research tells a different story. Leading primate evolutionist Todd Preuss made the following statement in the abstract of a 2012 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America review:
It is now clear that the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees are far more extensive than previously thought; their genomes are not 98% or 99% identical (Preuss 2012, p. 10709)
If they're not 98 or 99 percent identical, what percentage are they? To avoid beating around the bush and typing out a lot of scientific jargon, genome-wide, only 70% of the chimpanzee DNA was similar to human under the most optimal sequence-slice conditions. How profound is this difference? Humans and bananas have a 70% DNA similarity.
Chimpanzees and humans share many localized protein-coding regions of high similarity. However, overall there is extreme DNA sequence difference between human and chimp. Current studies along with several other recent reports confirm this. This throws the standard evolutionary dogma completely out the window and shoots down any presuppositions about a common ancestor.
In other words, when you call someone a monkey's uncle you're not commenting on their family, you're commenting on another theory gone bust. Don't worry about the evangelical evolutionist, there's plenty of other baseless bandwagons for them to climb on.
No comments:
Post a Comment