Missives

Another corner stone in evolutionary dogma is the alleged bestial lineage humans take from chimpanzees. This idea stemmed from J.B. Lamarck in the 1800s, then popularized by Darwin’s book The Descent of Man in 1871. Nearly all museum exhibits have some chimp standing behind Neanderthal man to illuminate the point. They’ve even placed a number on it. With the sequencing of the human genome, early attempts in the ‘70s calculated our similarities at 98.5%, nearly the same as chimps. Eureka, they declared, we are similar, and came from a common ancestor 3- to 6-million years ago; that is, until you understand how they arrived at that fictitious number.

Folks, the numbers are meant to deceive you. First, they don’t even have a chimp genome with which to compare. They estimate its genome based on parts of the human genome. Dr. Jeffrey Tomkins reports “the current chimpanzee genome wasn’t constructed based on its own merits. When DNA is sequenced, it’s produced in millions of small pieces that must be ‘stitched’ together with powerful computers. In large mammalian genomes like the chimpanzee, this isn’t easy, especially since very few genetic resources exist to aid the effort compared to those available for the human genome project. Because of this resource issue, a limited budget, and a healthy dose of evolutionary bias, the chimpanzee genome was put together using the human genome as a guide or scaffold onto which the little DNA sequence snippets were organized and stitched together.”  On top of that, the fabricated genome has “significant levels of human DNA contamination.” [1]  So much for comparing bananas to bananas.

Second, they only compared the protein coding regions, limiting the study to under 3% of the entire human genome! Worse yet, an evolutionary scientist in 2011 revealed the original study author, Dr. Sibley, manipulated the data so it would be more human-like. This is data manipulation and cherry-picking, to get any answer you want. Recent advances in DNA sequencing in the 21^st century appeared to bolster support for the 98.5% myth - but again, with cherry-picked data.  Dr. Tomkins re-evaluated these claims and by including the non-similar data, found a similarity of no more than 85%.

But isn’t that close enough?  Turns out that evolutionary timelines require a 99% similarity for known mutational rates to upscale a dumb ape into you, the reader. Anything less is a bridge too far (due to the ‘inadequate time’ problem we’ve already discussed); thus, their model of human origins collapses. As Dr. Brian Thomas puts it, “a 15% difference between human and chimp DNA [is staggering]. When you consider these genomes have over three billion DNA bases, we’re looking at 450,000,000 information bits that unintelligent forces of nature [must] expertly encode over only a few million years.” [2]

For the moment, though, let’s consider a high degree of similarity. A watermelon and a cloud have over 90% similarity due to high water content, but clouds don’t become watermelons.  Similarity by itself is meaningless.  Consider the two cars above:  a Porsche 911, made by Ferdinand “Ferry” Porsche, who also designed the Volkswagen Beetle.  Both cars have a four-cylinder, air-cooled rear engine and they share several other parts. [3] It stands to reason this reveals a common designer. Who made the Porsche: the VW’s hunk of metal, glass, plastic and rubber, or Ferdinand? Good design is replicated where it makes sense by a wise designer. Our Creator brought forth the living creature after his kind… and saw that it was good.  This is the only viable explanation.