It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Shocking Difference Between Human and Chimp Genomes found

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Cool video about human origins, I can't say everything in it is correct, but it is certainly closer than any mainstream scientific idea or theory is to the truth
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...


Researchers Find Shocking Difference Between Human and Chimp Genomes
www.broad.mit.edu...

Researchers Find Surprising Difference Between Human and Chimp Genomes

Cambridge, Mass., Thursday, February 10, 2005 – In today's online version of the journal Science , researchers report a surprising find: Despite 99% similarity at the level of DNA sequence between humans and our nearest relative, chimpanzees, the locations of DNA swapping between chromosomes, known as recombination hotspots, are nearly entirely different.

This difference is intriguing because one of the central tenets of modern biology is that specific DNA sequences determine biological function. In most cases, when DNA sequence is highly similar between two species, the biological function of that DNA is predictably similar as well.

The international research team consists of collaborating investigators from the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard; Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH); Harvard Medical School (HMS); the University of Oxford, UK; and the Biomedical Primate Research Centre, Netherlands.

Recombination shapes the patterns of genetic variation in a species. It is the process in which DNA from an individual's father and mother is reshuffled to create new combinations of genes in the child -- new combinations on which natural selection can act to shape the evolution of the species. Recently it was discovered that recombination does not occur at random across the human genome, but rather is localized to particular places in the genome called "hotspots."

Because these hotspots are very important to studying genetic disease in humans, the research team set out to compare recombination in the genomes of humans and chimpanzees. They expected that the patterns would be very similar between the species, and that by comparing the DNA it would be possible to identify particular DNA sequences that might explain the localization of recombination to hotpots.

In their paper, which will be published online by the journal Science at the Science Express web site February 10, the researchers report that:

* Although the DNA sequence of the two species is nearly identical, recombination hotspots were rarely, if ever, found at the same positions.
* Local patterns of recombination rate have evolved rapidly, in a manner disproportionate to the change in DNA sequence.

"We started trying to compare recombination in humans and chimpanzees a couple of years ago, in the hope that better understanding this fundamental mechanism might inform our approach to mapping genes for human diseases," said co-senior author Dr. David Altshuler, director of the Broad's program in Medical and Population Genetics and associate professor of genetics and of medicine at MGH and HMS. "However, progress was stymied because identifying hotspots was laborious and inefficient."

Fortuitously, Altshuler and Peter Donnelly, a professor of statistics at the University of Oxford, were co-chairing the analysis of the International Haplotype Map project (www.hapmap.org), a public project to map human genetic variation for use in disease research. Donnelly's laboratory had recently developed a statistical method that allowed recombination rates to be studied on a genomic scale. "We shared our ideas at a HapMap conference, and after discussions, teamed up with the Boston group for this study. It ended up being a very close collaboration, with daily contact, even though we were 3,000 miles away," said Donnelly, who is co-senior author on the paper.

Working together, the research team analyzed data collected in Boston with the methods developed in Oxford and was able to identify 18 hotspots in human and three hotspots in chimp. To their surprise, none of the hotspots occurred in the same locations in human and chimp.



and-
www.newscientist.com...

Many people have long believed humans and chimps share 99 of the same DNA, this however has been proven as false and fake. In just the last few years many completely unique sequences in both species have been found
www.sciencemag.org... esourcetype=HWCIT

also
www.arn.org...

More sources,
health.dailynewscentral.com...


Now genetic data reveals that the bigger the brain the slower it should evolve, that seams to disprove the notion of "Human Accelerated Genes"
cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com...



[edit on 3-6-2008 by Hollywood11]




posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 12:04 AM
link   
I don't know if 99% would be that far off. 1% of the genome is still quite a huge amount. That being said, interesting find......



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   
and yet again the findings go completely against what evolutionary theory would have thought



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Great work.

Amazing to think about and read.

We have a question to ask again.

Who and what the hell are we ?



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Hollywood11
 

Just why would it be shocking that there is a bigger % DNA difference between humans and chimps? I mean its HUMANS and CHIMPS - one is a backward knuckle dragging animal and the other climbs trees and lives in the jungle LOL.

Hell theres probably a 1% difference in DNA between humans never mind adding apes into the mix



G



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   
It's not just that the 99% number was wrong, but that recombination hotspots are in totally different locations when evolutionists predicted they would be in the same locations.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 08:36 PM
link   
So what are all the evolutionists (the ones who say we evolved from insert creature here) gonna rely on now. They always use these so called facts (humans and chimps have 99% of the same DNA) to discredit creationists. I have never thought we came from chimps and never had a way of disproving these so called facts that evolutionists sling haphazardly around all the time. It's like if you don't believe you came from (insert creature of choice here) than you are crazy these days. This coming from a generation of people who sit on there butts watching TV as if it came from God and is infallible.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 09:00 PM
link   


Just why would it be shocking that there is a bigger % DNA difference between humans and chimps? I mean its HUMANS and CHIMPS - one is a backward knuckle dragging animal and the other climbs trees and lives in the jungle LOL.


Where did we come from then ? Thats the big deal.
If there is no link to an animal on this planet, then where?



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hollywood11
and yet again the findings go completely against what evolutionary theory would have thought


These articles are like 6+ years old! Ignoring that, you sound like every other creationist talking about evolution with authority that hasn't leart the basics of evolution. This isn't contrary to evolution and no one is claiming it to be.

They're saying that pairs in DNA do not just randomly exchange to give us genetic variation. This is something that's common knowledge now and has been for years. If that were the case, you'd get a massive number of useless outcomes which were detrimental. This is what 9/10 creationists argue destroys evolution, when it's already known that's not what happens.

What does happen, is DNA pairs exchange only in certain positions on the strand and even then not randomly, specific segments exchange with specific other segments.
Variation occurs when you have enough creatures mating to form a large gene pool. This is why you get deformations and defects when inbreeding takes place because the same segments are exchanging. If it were random, inbreeding would never happen since genes would combine differently every time.

The big discovery came after equipment became sensitive enough to observe this taking place, which one of the articles does explain if you read it. They discovered that the segments of genes that cross are in different positions in humans than in chimps. All this proves is that we are more diverged than previously thought (95% vs 99%), plus it shows that we continue to diverge in opposite directions since the genes being naturally selected for are never the same.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by cancerian42
So what are all the evolutionists (the ones who say we evolved from insert creature here) gonna rely on now. They always use these so called facts (humans and chimps have 99% of the same DNA) to discredit creationists. I have never thought we came from chimps and never had a way of disproving these so called facts that evolutionists sling haphazardly around all the time. It's like if you don't believe you came from (insert creature of choice here) than you are crazy these days. This coming from a generation of people who sit on there butts watching TV as if it came from God and is infallible.


First off, while the results were not what was predicted as to occur, the data from the results does nothing to disprove evolution. Perhaps, a change in the hotspots is one of many reasons chimps and humans are no longer a sigular species but rather seperate ones with their own unique characteristics. Perhaps changes to these hotspots, including location play a major role in the evolutionary process. This study merely gives us more data and a better understanding of the genetic makeup between people and chimps, as well as an avenue for more research.

Secondly, there isn't a credible scientist out there that claims Homo sapiens evolved from chimps. The claim has always been that they share a common anscestor. I'm still waiting for any evidence put forth supporting ID let alone creationism. Outside of attacking Evolution, there is no evidence to support either of them.



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Humans didn't come from chimpanzees, R3KR. Chimps and bonobos are just as evolutionarily advanced as we are. Our relation is that of cousins, not of descent.

Cool finding, OP, but "surprising" and "shocking" mean two different things. The researchers are intrigued by these findings, not cast to the floor in a dry-heaving mess because evolution has just crumbled beneath their fingertips.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hollywood11
It's not just that the 99% number was wrong, but that recombination hotspots are in totally different locations when evolutionists predicted they would be in the same locations.
Meteorologists 'predict' the weather every day and they're hardly ever right and come to think on it DNA was only discovered 50 odd years ago and with over 3 billion base pairs in the human genome I think these people can be forgiven for some degree of error. Hell it took thousands of years from the invention of the wheel to get to a car did it not?


Originally posted by cancerian42
So what are all the evolutionists (the ones who say we evolved from insert creature here) gonna rely on now. They always use these so called facts (humans and chimps have 99% of the same DNA) to discredit creationists. I have never thought we came from chimps and never had a way of disproving these so called facts that evolutionists sling haphazardly around all the time. It's like if you don't believe you came from (insert creature of choice here) than you are crazy these days. This coming from a generation of people who sit on there butts watching TV as if it came from God and is infallible.
At least the evolutionists have FACTS - what do the creationists have???? 1 book that is supposed to come from god and be infallible.


Originally posted by R3KR



Just why would it be shocking that there is a bigger % DNA difference between humans and chimps? I mean its HUMANS and CHIMPS - one is a backward knuckle dragging animal and the other climbs trees and lives in the jungle LOL.


Where did we come from then ? Thats the big deal.
If there is no link to an animal on this planet, then where?
I was being sarcastic and slightly mocking to the suggestion of creationism. Humans and all greater apes evolved from a common ancestor millions of years ago - as someone just stated we are just as evolutionary advanced as all primates.


G



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Come on, people. Before you try to bash evolution, at least understand modern evolutionary theory.

The similarity between chimp and human DNA may be 95-99%, but that isn't meant to imply we descended from chimps.

Humans and chimps are believed to have shard a common ancestor, a very long time ago, with both species having had millions of years of divergent evolution along their own path.

The study assumed, falsely, that because of the high degree of similarity between the rest of the genome, that they could study these hot spots to gain insight on human ailments. The fact that these hotspots weren't where they thought they would be is part of the difference between the two species, not some proof against evolution.

Look at the varied history of only the Genus Homo, our Genus, of which chimpanzees are not a member.

Making absurd claims about a theory when you're ignorant of even the modern data involved therein only serves as an embarrassment to your constituents, and furthers the "ignorant creationist" stereotype.

Oh, and I believe in God.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join