I was sent this link as evidence that humans are descended from apes: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence
I read through the various points with an open mind because I’m ready to admit being wrong when I am wrong. However, there wasn’t anything in there that I hadn’t read or heard before. It was really just another case of taking the facts we have at our disposal and postulating a theory to explain human origins. Unfortunately that will always be influenced, if not defined by, our presuppositions.
I don’t have the time to refute everything on that site, it’s been done by others smarter than me before (and no doubt countered back and forth more times than we’d care to count by now). But since genetics are such a hot topic and evidently “prove” evolution, I’ve spent some time analysing the argument:
#1. “While the genetic difference between individual humans today is minuscule – about 0.1%, on average – study of the same aspects of the chimpanzee genome indicates a difference of about 1.2%….A comparison of the entire genome, however, indicates that segments of DNA have also been deleted, duplicated over and over, or inserted from one part of the genome into another. When these differences are counted, there is an additional 4 to 5% distinction between the human and chimpanzee genomes.” So if a 0.1% difference in the genome makes for the *incredible* variety in humans (different skin colours, variation in features, stature etc.), how can a 5 – 6.2% difference be insignificant? It’s more accurate to say our genome is closing on 2 orders of magnitude different to apes. So while there may be superficial similarities between humans and apes, our underlying blueprints are very different.
#2. “No matter how the calculation is done, the big point still holds: humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos are more closely related to one another than either is to gorillas or any other primate. From the perspective of this powerful test of biological kinship, humans are not only related to the great apes – we are one.” Erm and the evidence for that is what? Did they just ignore their own previous statement? May I point out that cats are a mere 10% removed from humans (and pigs even less I believe but they probably didn’t want to mention that inconvenient fact: http://uk.businessinsider.com/comparing-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-other-things-2016-5/#for-humans-were-999-similar-to-the-person-sitting-next-to-us-the-rest-of-those-genes-tell-us-everything-from-our-eye-color-to-if-were-predisposed-to-certain-diseases-1). I’m not a genetic scientist but I understand mathematical relationships and I can also tell the difference between inference and deduction and this is heavily inferred reasoning: https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/26svdo/eli5_the_difference_between_a_deduction_and_an/
#3. “The last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees lived between 8 and 10 million years ago. We do not yet have it’s remains.” That much is true and I appreciated the honesty of the article for admitting that fact (rather than fabricating a Lucy to make the facts fit the theory). It is rather troubling that after the millions of fossils unearthed they still haven’t found a missing link. Probably because there isn’t one.
The fact is, our presuppositions force you to interpret the evidence in a certain way…
Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone