It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A comparison of Clint's genetic blueprints with that of the human genome shows that our closest living relatives share 96 percent of our DNA. The number of genetic differences between humans and chimps is ten times smaller than that between mice and rats.
Scientists also discovered that some classes of genes are changing unusually quickly in both humans and chimpanzees, as compared with other mammals. These classes include genes involved in the perception of sound, transmission of nerve signals, and the production of sperm.
This isn't sort of thing isn't explained very well by creationists/intelligent designers. I'd love to hear from anybody. If we really evolved totally seperately all these many many years, we would not be so closely related.
Originally posted by TheCelestialHuman
reply to post by Southern Guardian
I think it's about time humans accept their lowly origins and stop being so conceited, believing that the entire universe was created with them in mind. Most people have no idea how unimportant they are.
"Depending upon what it is that you are comparing you can say 'Yes, there's a very high degree of similarity, for example between a human and a pig protein coding sequence', but if you compare rapidly evolving non-coding sequences from a similar location in the genome, you may not be able to recognise any similarity at all. This means that blanket comparisons of all DNA sequences between species are not very meaningful."
Originally posted by UltimateSkeptic1
I'm not sure your point has much logic.
The similar DNA doesn't preclude creationism, intelligent design, nor does it prove evolution.
How does 96% common DNA imply causation?
I believe in God, I also believe that God is responsible for evolution. Why not?
96% cannot merely be coincidence.