Saturday, February 23, 2013

Human - Chimp Chromosome Comparisons

Both articles claiming 96% similarity between Humans and Chimps

 are from 2005, i.e., from seven years ago.

This is widely known to be out-of-date data.
Since the first crude attempt to sequence the chimp genome on a budget
less than 1/10 that used for the human genome project,
it has come to light that the methodology was faulty and contamination
was evident.

Genome size data for chimps and humans using flow cytometry
of cell nuclei to estimate nuclear DNA content, indicates that the chimp genome
may be up to 10% larger than the human genome (

The most recent version of the chimp genome assembly at
confirms the data from flow cytometry studies showing that
the chimp genome is AT LEAST 8% larger than the human genome.

These are the real up-to-date data on genome-size.

The article I referenced, which IS up-to-date in regard to at least one
whole chromosome, freshly sequenced, was just published in 2010.

 The new 2010 article shows an addition 1.5% divergence specifically in the Y-chromosome section.

96% - 1.5% = 94.5%.

More disinformation.

But the other links clearly show an additional 8% of the Chimp Genome was also neglected
in the total genome comparison, because it was simply discarded in that and the discussion.

94.5% - 8% = 86.5%

More disinformation.

But the earlier discussion of how the original 98% estimates were guesstimated
shows that less than 5% of the actual genome was compared in those estimates.

So those estimates were worthless in the first place.

More disinformation discovered.

The final 2006 comparisons with the shoddily constructed chimp genome (fuller version)
were also unreliable, because the chimp genome was reconstructed on a doubly
faulty basis, first using the Human Genome as the map instead of doing a chimp map,
and second because of contamination of the chimp samples.

More disinformation discovered.

While we are listening to Evolutionists claim that the
entire Human / Chimp genome has been allegedly compared in detail (as of 2005),
we should note carefully
what the 2010 article reports
in passing
on the topic of complete Genome comparisons:

"...chromosome 21, [is] the only other chromosome comprehensively mapped and sequenced in both species16. "

16. Watanabe, H. et al. DNA sequence and comparative analysis of chimpanzee chromosome 22. Nature 429, 382–388 (2004)
| Article |

They conveniently provide the map, which indeed shows the strong similarity in chromosome 21 (one arm only!):

Each dot represents 100% chimpanzee–human identity within a 200-base-pair (bp) window. In the Y-chromosome plot, the human chromosome is oriented with short arm to top and long arm to bottom, and the chimpanzee chromosome is oriented with short arm to left and long arm to right. For chromosome 21, which is acrocentric, the plot represents only the long arm.

Here the strong diagonal line on the right (chromosome 21 long half)
indeed shows how strongly the Human and Chimp DNA aligns
(The dots however are not contiguous, and greater resolution would show holes).

Now look at the Y-Chromosome comparison. NOTHING lines up in position,
there IS no orientation that can give maximum alignment,
and half the content has no mapping at all between Human and Chimp.

This is NOT a simple case of some empty repeats 'tacked on the end',
as some have tried to misleadingly claim.

Most of the non-alignable regions contain both protein-coding genes
(7 families not found in chimps) and bizarre anagram-code (on the chimp side)
which is indeed functional, although only just discovered and hardly understood.

What the data shows plainly, is that humans are indeed from planet earth,
but that the chimp Y-chromosome may be from Mars.

Conspiracy theorists and Alien Visitor investigators will be all over this,
for the next 20 years. Because there is nothing like it in the genome
of ANY animals so far sequenced.

The other projection from the investigative article shows even more clearly
the very suspicious recombination cleavage artifacts,
which indicate that this chromosome was artificially cut in fixed lengths
having nothing to do with the content of the chromosome, or its functional
sections. The authors may have been too disturbed by its implications
or potential misinterpretations to put it in the main article.

The data strongly suggests that the chimp is an artificially gene-customized lab animal.

Such constructs obviously won't conveniently fit on any evolutionary tree at all.

There is another explanation however, that is the most plausible, but will be the least popular:
that the databases for the chimp have been compromised by shoddy low budget methodology,
which makes them useless for comparisons where the Chimp Genome has indeed been obliterated.

but what is in fact far more likely,
is that the 'matches' to the human genome are false positives
due to contamination of the chimp database with human DNA.


No comments: