Happy New Year! No. 1 Story for 2025: Bombshell Overturns Myth of 1 Percent Difference

1 percent myth, 1 percent myth (series), burying the lede, chimpanzees, common ancestry, David Klinghoffer, DNA, Evolution, gap difference, genomes, human exceptionalism, Human Origins and Anthropology, humans, Icons of Evolution, Jonathan Wells, Kevin Williamson, Museum of Natural History, National Review, Nature (journal), science journalism, Smithsonian Institution, statistics, Supplementary Data, zombies
This finding should be major news in the science world, yet those involved don’t seem interested in highlighting the discovery. Source
Read More

Casey Luskin on the Rising Tide of Intelligent Design Research

biological features, biological traits, body plans, Casey Luskin, Christmas, common ancestry, complex parts, discoveries, Engineering, Evolution, evolutionary biology, functionality, genome, genome sequencing, ID The Future, Intelligent Design, Junk DNA, Neo-Darwinism, organs, origin of life, orphan genes, predictions, purpose, Research, teleology, tide, trees of life, universe
Any scientific theory for the origin of life and the universe is only as strong as its research program. For intelligent design, this is good news. Source
Read More

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

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

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

Challenged on the “1 Percent” Myth, Smithsonian Gives a Meaningless Non-Answer

1 percent myth, chimp genome, chimpanzees, chimps, common ancestry, common design, computer programmers, Discovery Institute, Donald Trump, Elizabeth Shenk, Evan Eichler, Evolution, Evolution News, geneticists, genetics, human genome, Human Origins and Anthropology, humans, National Museum of Natural History, Nature (journal), signage, Smithsonian Institution, Supplemental Data, taxpayers, University of Washington
Note to President Trump: I find this pretty disrespectful to the people who pay the bills at the Smithsonian. Source
Read More

Bombshell: New Research Overturns Claim that Humans and Chimps Differ by Only 1 Percent of DNA

burying the lede, chimpanzees, common ancestry, David Klinghoffer, DNA, Evolution, gap difference, genomes, human exceptionalism, Human Origins and Anthropology, humans, Icons of Evolution, Jonathan Wells, Kevin Williamson, Museum of Natural History, National Review, Nature (journal), science journalism, Smithsonian Institution, statistics, Supplementary Data, zombies
This finding should be major news in the science world, yet those involved don’t seem interested in highlighting the discovery. Source
Read More

Günter Bechly on Life’s Sudden Information Explosions

ancestral species, Avalon explosion, bacteria, biological explosions, body plans, Cambrian Explosion, common ancestry, descendant species, Evolution, genes, Günter Bechly, ID The Future, Intelligent Design, mammals, neo-Darwinian process, paleontologists, paleontology, placental mammals, Podcast, protein folds, Sarah Chaffee, Stephen Meyer, Triassic explosion
“There’s no reasonable way,” Bechly concludes, “to get from bacteria to mammals via evolutionary processes.” Source
Read More

Is the Panda’s Thumb Suboptimal?

adaptationism, carnivores, common ancestry, computed topography, dexterity, digits, economy, efficiency, Evolution, evolutionists, George Schaller, Intelligent Design, leaves, live observation, magnetic resonance imaging, mammals, Panda's Thumb, pseudo-thumb, Religions (journal), shoots, Stephen Jay Gould, suboptimality, The Giant Pandas of Wolong
The basic argument is that “[o]dd arrangements and funny solutions” point to evolution whereas “ideal design” points to a “sensible God.” Source
Read More