A study published in the latest edition of the British scientific journal Nature (1) compared the chimpanzee chromosome 22 with its equivalent, the chromosome 21 in humans. The study, performed by the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium, revealed important differences. The Nature news service announced the study under the headline "Chimp chromosome creates puzzles" and included the interpretation, "First sequence is unexpectedly different from human equivalent."
The latest genomic comparison between human being and chimpanzee DNA has revealed that the differences between these two living things are more complex than had been expected.
A study published in the latest edition of the British scientific journal Nature (1) compared the chimpanzee chromosome 22 with its equivalent, the chromosome 21 in humans. The study, performed by the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium, revealed important differences. The Nature news service announced the study under the headline "Chimp chromosome creates puzzles" and included the interpretation, "First sequence is unexpectedly different from human equivalent." The same article also included these words by Dr. Jean Weissenbach, from France"s National Sequencing Centre in Evry: "Chromosome 22 makes up only 1% of the genome, so in total there could be thousands of genes that significantly differ between humans and chimps."
This study, which produced such unexpected differences between the living things in question, also once again reveals that the genetic similarity propaganda frequently reflected in the press is not based on a sound logical progression. The studies that evolutionists use as a propaganda tool for their claims that "man is 99% chimpanzee" do not actually fully represent the two living things" genomes. That is because there is an as yet unfinished chimpanzee genome study still going on. That being the case, it is unrealistic for evolutionists to generalise from the results obtained from the comparison of partial DNA components. To draw an analogy, that interpretation resembles announcing that two books with a 99% similarity in two of their paragraphs in their letter sequences are going to have the same level of similarity in all their other paragraphs, without even looking at these. That leads to a deceptive picture. That is because the deceptive nature of the previous studies used as propaganda vehicles by evolutionists have been openly admitted by scientists engaged in this research. In the same way that the research has revealed similarities between the two living things, it has also come up with previously unknown information, or information interpreted entirely differently by evolutionists.
In the research it was determined that 1.44% of the chimp chromosome 22 consists of single base substitutions known as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and that there were differentiations known as indels (insertions and deletions) in some 68,000 regions. Indels are an expression of insertions and deletions in the mutual nucleotide sequences of the genomes compared. In the chimp chromosome 22, the length of these may be limited to 30 nucleotides in some regions and be as high as 54,000 nucleotides in others.
| A | G | T | C | G | T | A | C | C |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| A | G | T | C | A | T | A | C | C |
SNP
| A | G | T | C | G | T | A | C | C |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | | 1 | 1 |
| A | G | T | C | | | | C | C |
indels
The way that the differences in protein coding regions did not lag behind non-coding regions in proportionate terms and led to differences in the proteins produced by these, was a most astonishing discovery for scientists. From an evolutionary perspective, scientists used to regard non-protein coding regions as left over from the imaginary evolutionary process, and as junk DNA. Again from that point of view, the likelihood that similarities in regions coding protein during the imaginary evolutionary process had been maintained was regarded as relatively higher than that in non-coding regions. According to the theory of evolution, since they were not functional and should have been eliminated by natural selection, levels of similarity between humans and chimps should have been rather low. In this study, the realisation that in terms of differences between the two living things the protein coding regions were very close to the non-protein coding regions revealed results that were the exact opposite of evolutionist expectations. For more detail about the invalidity of the junk DNA claim, see http://www.darwinism-watch.com/junk_dna_myth.php).
Differences at the amino acid sequence level were determined in 83% of the 231 coding sequences. The effect on protein structure of the differences between the two living things further increases the size of the differences. This, in turn, reveals that earlier studies that showed these differences to be only superficial, were deceptive.
Yoshiyuki Sakaki, director of the RIKEN Genomic Sciences Center in Japan and also president of the research consortium, says with regard to the protein structure that the differences have a big effect, and that the impression given be previous studies that revealed a difference of between 1.23% and 5% was misleading. (3)
A Reuters report regarding the research quoted scientists as saying:
"Clearly, the genomic differences between humans and chimps are much more complicated than conventional wisdom has portrayed." (4)
The results of the study aimed at deciphering the chimpanzee genome are expected to be unveiled at the end of this year, and since this study is based on partial DNA comparison it will be far from offering a totally clear picture. However, the deceptive nature of the evolutionist propaganda that seeks to show the genetic differences between human and chimp as superficial has already been revealed.
The research also constitutes a final example of the double standards used by the Darwinist media in publications regarding comparative genetic studies. This study, that revealed a difference as high a level as 83% and that astonished scientists, was ignored by certain circles in Turkey, as it was in many countries of the world, and was not announced. If you wish you can read about previous examples of the bigotry of the Darwinist media reporting on similar high levels of similarity HERE.
1. Fujiyama, A. et al. “DNA sequence and comparative analysis of chimpanzee chromosome 22,” Nature 429, 27 May 2004, pp. 382 - 388
2. Laura Nelson, “First chimp chromosome creates puzzles”, Nature Science Update, 27 May 2004, http://www.nature.com/nsu/040524/040524-8.html
3. Cathy Holding, “Chimps are not like humans”, the-Scientist.com, 27 May 2004, http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20040527/01
4. Maggie Fox, “Chimp DNA almost identical to ours”, Reuters, 27 May 2004, (our emphasis) http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/enviro/EnviroRepublish_1117169.htm
