30Jun 2025 by Post

On Human-Chimp Genetic Differences, the Critics Misstate My Arguments 

1 percent myth, chimps, Chimps and Critics (series), common ancestry, common design, creationists, Discovery Institute, Evolution, evolutionary biology, genetic differences, genetic similarities, genetic variation, genetics, geologists, Human Origins and Anthropology, humans, Institute for Creation Research, Intelligent Design, Jeff Tomkins, Joel Duff, Jonathan Wells, National Museum of Natural History, persistent scientific errors, PZ Myers, Smithsonian Institution, University of Akron, University of Minnesota, YouTube videos, Zachary Ardern, zombies
Evolution defenders generally accept the new evidence showing that humans and chimps are 15 percent genetically different but downplay the new number. Source
Read More
26Jun 2025 by Post

Critics Change the Topic: Do Human-Human Genetic Differences Matter? 

1 percent myth, Amazon, chimps, Chimps and Critics (series), CHM13, common ancestry, DNA, Evolution, Financial Times, function, genetic difference, genetics, genomes, Genomics Proteomics & Bioinformatics, Han Chinese, human exceptionalism, Human Origins and Anthropology, human-human genetic differences, humans, Jared Diamond, Joel Duff, Junk DNA, Nature Communications, non-alignable DNA, Nucleic Acids Research, nucleotides, objections, reactions, repetitive DNA, Science (journal), Smithsonian Institution, University of Chicago Press, Zachary Ardern
One of the common yet unexpected reactions from critics to the discovery that humans and chimps are 15 percent genetically different is to change the topic. Source
Read More
20Jun 2025 by Post

Do Large Genetic Differences Between Humans and Chimps Represent “Technical Failures”? 

1 percent myth, alignment failure, biological processes, chimps, Chimps and Critics (series), common ancestry, deletions, DNA, Evolution, gap divergence, genes, genetic differences, genetics, genome, haplotype, Human Origins and Anthropology, humans, insertions, megabases, Nature (journal), repetitive elements, sequence alignment, Supplemental Data, technical problems
The insinuation is that something went wrong in the lab during the attempted alignment process. Source
Read More