quote:
But more to the topic...todays New Scientist is reporting that a study by Morris Goodman's group (if you are out there SLPx maybe you can confirm this?) suggest that humans are about 99.4% similar to chimps in coding sequences. A recent study by Roy Britten suggested a 5% difference. The discrepancy between the two is that Goodman focused on coding sequences and Britten included non-coding.
Britten also includes the number of estimated
sites in insertions and deletions. For example, the 'old way' would count a 100 base deletion as a single difference (since with rare exceptions, such deletions/insertions would have been one-time events). Britten's method would count a 100 base deletion as 100 differences.
So, applying Britten's methoid universally would simply make everything more gentically distant from everything else, and thus not really impact the relative differences at all.
quote:
Thus Goodman calls for the inclusion of P. troglodytes and P. panicus in the genus Homo with us...
He has suggesting this for years, in our 2001 paper, we suggest this.
quote:
Well, why not..I have met plenty of people who are hairier and less literate than a chimp and they are still Homo
I saw an argument by a poster at internet infidels that I thought was also relevant...he argues it does not matter how you classify other primates..the creationists will turn it around and say ok, chimps descended from humans and represent the fall of man...
Interesting.. Creationists say the wackiest things. Like evolution has stopped, or humans were the 'target' of directed evolution...
™ Version 4.2
