THE APE-MAN SIMILARITY IS A TALE!
The completion of human's gene map today does not yield the result that
man and ape are relatives. One need not be deceived by evolutionists'
attempts to exploit this new scientific development just as they do with
As known, the recent completion of the human gene map within the scope
of the Human Genome Project has been a very important scientific improvement.
However, some results of this project are being distorted in some evolutionist
publications. It is claimed that the genes of chimpanzees have a similarity
to human genes by 98 % and this is promoted as an evidence to the claim
that apes are close to humans, and therefore, to the theory of evolution.
In truth, this is a "fake" evidence put forward by evolutionists
who benefit from the lack of knowledge of society about this subject.
98 % Similarity Claim is a Misleading Propaganda
First, it should be stated that the 98% similarity concept, frequently
advanced by evolutionists about the DNAs of man and chimpanzee, is deceptive.
In order to claim that the genetic make-ups of man and chimpanzee bear
98 % similarity, the genome of the chimpanzee also has to be mapped just
as that of man's, the two has to be compared, and the result of this comparison
has to be obtained. However no such result is available, because so far,
only the gene of mankind has been mapped. No such research is yet done
for the chimpanzee.
In reality, the 98 % similarity between the genes of man and ape, which
now and then becomes an agenda item, is a propaganda oriented slogan deliberately
invented years ago. This similarity is an extraordinarily exaggerated
generalisation grounded on the similarity in the amino acid sequences
of some 30-40 basic proteins present in man and chimpanzee. A sequence
analysis has been made with a method named "DNA hybridization"
on the DNA sequences that are correlated with these proteins and only
those limited number of proteins have been compared.
However there are about hundred thousand genes, and therefore 100 thousand
proteins coded by these genes in humans. For that reason, there is no
scientific basis for claiming that all the genes of man and ape are 98
% similar only because of the similarity in 40 out of 100.000 proteins.
On the other hand, the DNA comparison carried out on those 40 proteins
is also controversial. This comparison was made in 1987 by two biologists
named Sibley and Ahlquist and published in the periodical named Journal
of Molecular Evolution. (v.26 pp. 99-1212) However another scientist
named Sarich who examined the data obtained by these two scientists concluded
that the reliability of the method they used is controversial and that
the data has been exaggeratedly interpreted. (Sarich et al, 1989, Cladisticts
5:3-32) Dr. Don Batten, another biologist, also analysed the issue in
1996 and concluded that the real similarity rate is 96.2%, not 98 %. (CEN,
19(1); 21-22 December 1996-February 1997)
Human DNA is also similar to that of the worm, mosquito
Moreover, the above mentioned basic proteins are common vital molecules
present in various other living beings. The structure of the same kinds
of proteins present not only in chimpanzee, but also in completely different
living beings, is very similar to that in the humans.
For example, the genetic analyses published in New Scientist have
revealed a 75 % similarity between the DNAs of nematode worms and man.
(New Scientist, 15 May 1999, p.27) This definitely does not mean
that there is only a 25% difference between man and these worms! According
to the family tree made by evolutionists, the Chordata phylum, in which
man is included, and Nematoda phylum were different from each other even
530 million years ago.
On the other hand, in another finding which also appeared in the Turkish
media, it was stated that the comparisons carried out between the genes
of fruit fly belonging to the Drosophila species and human genes yielded
a similarity of 60%. (Hürriyet, 24 February 2000)
On the other hand, the analyses done on some proteins show man as close
to some very different living beings. In a survey carried out by the researchers
in Cambridge University, some proteins of land dwelling animals were compared.
Amazingly, in nearly all samples, man and chicken were paired as the closest
relatives. The next closest relative was crocodile. (New Scientist
v.103, 16 August 1984, p.19)
Another example used by evolutionists on "the genetic similarity
between man and ape", is the presence of 48 chromosomes in chimpanzees
and gorillas versus 46 chromosomes in man. Evolutionists regard the closeness
of the number of chromosomes as indication of an evolutionary relationship.
However, if this logic used by evolutionists were true, then man should
have an even closer relative than chimpanzee: "the potato"!.
Because the number of chromosomes in potatoes is the same as that of man:
These examples certify that the concept of genetic similarity does not
constitute evidence for the theory of evolution. This is because the genetic
similarities are not in line with the alleged evolution schemes, and on
the contrary, they yield completely opposite results.
Genetic Similarities Upset the "Evolution Scheme"
that is Sought to be Constituted
Unsurprisingly, when the issue is evaluated as a whole, it is seen that
the subject of "bio-chemical similarities" does not constitute
an evidence for evolution, but on the contrary leaves the theory in the
lurch. Dr. Christian Schwabe, a biochemistry researcher from the Medical
Faculty of South Carolina University, is an evolutionist scientist who
has spent years to find evidence for evolution in the molecular domain.
He particularly did researches on insulin and relaxin-type proteins and
tried to establish evolutionary relationships between living beings. However,
he had to confess for many times that he could not find any evidence for
evolution at any point in his studies. In an article published in Science
magazine, he said;
"Molecular evolution is about to be accepted as a
method superior to palaeontology for the discovery of evolutionary relationships.
As a molecular evolutionist I should be elated. Instead it seems disconcerting
that many exceptions exist to the orderly progression of species as determined
by molecular homologies; so many in fact that I think the exception, the
quirks, may carry the more important message" (Christian Schwabe,
"On the Validity of Molecular Evolution", Trends in Biochemical
Sciences. V.11, July 1986)
Based on the recent findings obtained in the field of molecular biology,
the renowned biochemist Prof. Michael Denton made the following comments;
"Each class at molecular level is unique, isolated
and unlinked by intermediates. Thus, molecules, like fossils, have failed
to provide the elusive intermediates so long sought by evolutionary biology…
At a molecular level, no organism is "ancestral" or "primitive"
or "advanced" compared with its relatives… There is little doubt
that if this molecular evidence had been available a century ago… the
idea of organic evolution might never have been accepted." (Michael
Denton, Evolution; A Theory in Crisis, London; Burnett Books 1985
Similarities are not Evidence for Evolution but for
It is surely natural for the human body to bear some molecular similarities
to other living beings, because they all are made up of the same molecules,
they all use the same water and atmosphere, and they all consume foods
consisting of the same molecules. Certainly, their metabolisms and therefore
genetic make-ups would resemble to one another. This, however, is not
evidence that they evolved from a common ancestor.
This "common material" is not the result of an evolution but
of "common design", that is, their being created upon the same
It is possible to explain this subject with an example; all constructions
in the world are done with similar materials (brick, iron, cement, etc.).
This, however, does not mean that these buildings "evolved"
from each other. They are constructed separately by using common materials.
The same is true for living beings as well.
Life did not originate as a result of unconscious coincidences as evolution
claims, but as the result of the creation of God, the Almighty, the owner
of infinite knowledge and wisdom.