<<..The GSS sequences were derived..from a project that involved mapping the chimp genome...In addition,..we are testing a variety of different alignment parameters.

Our preliminary results..show that the human..and chimp genomes are more dissimilar ..than commonly reported...Our research also shows that highly selective..and stringent alignment methods..can exclude important data,..*providing inflated genome similarity estimates.

continues../@\..link

how/you\..say..in latin..;..*hung../on\..own..petard?

http://www.icr.org/article/evaluating-human-chimp-dna-myth-new/

yet again silence/i know those who back evolution
think they 'hang'..with the clever huys

yet i present a science paper..that says as little as 70 percent
[NOT 98 percent]..similarity..between chimps..and us..[but not them.

anyhow..ignoRING THE SCIENCE
WHEN YOU CLAIM SCIENCE..that 'silence'..speaks volumes
their so sure of their theory..yet cant defend it/CAUSE THEY HAVE FAITH IN EVOLVING..not gnosis.

lest we recall we share 50 percent..of our dna with banana
so be careful eating our ancestors..it reveals why THEY TAKE GODLESSNESS ON FAITH.

its sad but its obvious..tOO
taken on faith anything is better THAN Trying to defend/what you dont grasp/..EVOLUTION-Theory'..yet these faithful/Scientology..ACCO-LITES OF THE DARKNESS..[IGNORANCE]..swear true../FACT..[lol]..A FALSE THEORY/..

EVEN NOW..A REFUTED THESIS..to the point of
denying god his rightful glory..of creation

one cannot serve..two masters

OUG presents us with a stunning example of creationist gobbledigook with "..shares no immediate genetic ancestry*..with chimpanzees,." Exactly what are we to understand by the words "immediate genetic ancestry" in terms of our genetic relationship with chimpanzees? There is a certain whiff of the oxymoronic here as if the onomatopoea and juxtapositioning of the three scientific words, regardless of their relevance, were sufficient to carry the day.
One cannot disregard the creationist penchant for linguistic slyness and the misuse of scientific processes [like A.A.Snelling's radiocarbon dating of billion-year old geological samples in order to prove a young Earth or the unreliability of the dating method.]
Creation Biology?.......a self-contradiction, a grandiose and grotesque presumption to legitimacy that appeals to the intellectually disfunctional.

extropian/wun..YOU SOUND LIKE YOU MAY BE ABLE TO CLARIFY
a few points..like the first life../living..how what genus..into what genus it evolved into..[you know a few SCIENCE FACTS]

I NOTE YOU POST AND RUN/Generally..

26/02/2014 3:54:23 PM OUG presents us with a stunning example of creationist gobbledigook with "..shares no.....
»..10/02/2014 5:38:43 AM/..Science, as we recognise it today, is the new boy on the block./..It has demonstrated a phen.....
»..25/02/2012 10:06:30 AM Paul/..Komanicki writes; "We’ve met only two other Aussies here but everybody who stro.....

»..25/02/2012 7:48:04 AM/..My son is the first in our family, as far as I can discover, to study for a university deg.....
»..19/11/2010 12:41:13 PM/..Joe [Loudmouth] writes; <"rightful control" ? China has the right, like any.....
»..18/11/2010 10:51:06 AM/..The time is approaching fast when Australia [and NZ] must decide where our best interests .....
»..16/06/2010 7:04:13/..PM Well said Amicus. One need only familiarise one's self with the cultural history of Tibet .....

but..please/this tIME../hang around..and talk
DONT/RUN..AWAY..LIKE,..ALL THE/OTHERS.

TO QUOTE..YOU..<<..Exactly what are..we to understand..by the words "immediate genetic ancestry"..in terms of..our genetic relationship with chimpanzees?>>

GOOD QUESTION
IN THE IMMEDIATE..Family LEVEL genome..[genus]
the people/..AT THE LINK FEEL/confirm..they have the proof..OF..nix nadda...nuthin

ie..that mankiND..<<..shares no immediate genetic ancestry*..with chimpanzees,." >.

ITS NOT/ROCKET SCIENCE..OR GOOBER GOOK
we cant*have come,..*by apes..[and the LINK PROVES IT]

[IT WAS PIGS/SEE..OTHER-LINK]..BUT..expectiNG YOU SCIENCE GUYS..TO BE CLEVER*..ENOUGH..iN GNOSIS..OF YOUR SCIENCE..TO UNDERSTAND**WHATS BEEN REVEALED..BY STUDYING THE FACTS..seems/tOO..HARD[IGNORANCE/BEING..BLOSS?

science fact./now refutes..the chiMP CHUMP evolution THESUS
but..you lot took so much..on faith..you gOT..NO Comprehension of SCIENCE METHOD...THAT/FINALY..REFUTED..THE LIE.

[AND]..that was ONLY..ONE OF The revelation'S..the other
is on..the christian..weak END THREAD..
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15995&page=0

but please feel/free to refute..that/too.if you can
even..if you..cant name one science/quality evolution..into new genus[ever]..not one..

..yet ya fooled..em all/FOR/A WHILE..ONLY..but in the end[weak end]..true science..finds only god creation standing..]..ie science dont know..IT/WAS..BY PIG.

now..we think/KNOW..its that we came from pigs
i posted that..the last evolutionist THREAD
BUT GOOGLE IT..And weep ..

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=MAN+COMES+FROM+PIGS+NOT+CHIMPS

but swine..we are come from..not ape
[MISSED IT/BY..THAT MUCH..LOL]

ANYHOW..[GOD loveS ya
anyhow][now ya know..why pig is unclean*..its ya graNDMA.]

SUCH..A CLEVER/APE..LOL

the theory of darwinian evolution..of chimps into man..IS a self-contradiction, a grandiose and grotesque presumption to legitimacy that appeals to the intellectually dis functional...of those faithful..TO A godless god free creation/story.

in scIENCE..being half wrong is being all wrong
the math never did ad up..till you got the pig 'evE'..OF MEN-KIND
what got RAPED BY SOME APE LIKE CHIMP ADAM..that wanted what 'the beasts got'..a maTE.

ANYHOW..THE OLD Sow [eve]..gave birth to 11 wee tiny piglets
THere was a shortage of feeding stations/thus these critters..fought for their suck at the nipple[they been fightING EVER SINCE.

now i havnt been studying 'mules'..HYBREDS..BUT WHERE THEY ARE NORMALLY INFERTILE..BUT CLEARLY TWO OR MORE ..OF THESE PIG APES..bred succesfuy..because here WE ARE

Where are we now..../OUR RACE WAS CREATED BY WHAT LOOKS LIKE RAPE[or a very lusty sow..lets TRUST IT WAs the later]..and of the resultant hybreds..at least 7 of the f1..was fertile/EVES..[IF YOU FOLLOW THE 7 EVE THEORY]..ITS LIKELY ONE [OR TWO]..was a fertile male..

by our races we could determine their piggy colors
BUT ITS WORTH NOTING..THAT roman wolf..feeding romulous et'al
is closer to the root OF MAn..only the wolf is a sow/feeding little ape men

thing is you heard this science
via a CREATIONIST..WHO YET SEES GOD HAND IN ALL OF THIS

[I KNOW BY THE STUNNED SILENCE..both sides feel they lost
but get over it..both of us were a little RIGHT..A LITLE WRONG
but how darwin missed the pig thing/and all of you 'evolutionists'..as well/thats because you haVE FAITH..NOT KNOWING

BUT WORSE..now ignore the knowing TOO
its so sad but apathetic..so much more my guides could have lED US TOO
but that we lacked the question..[so thanks Extropian1,..WELL DONE]

WELL DONE JOHAN..YOU KNOW Both sides of the faithful hate yoU NOW?

yes i DO LORD
BUT YOU ASKED ME TO COMFORT THEM..FIRST I MUST BREAK THEIR DELUSIONS..

THEN HOPE YOU SEND THYNE Guidance..HELPERS
WER'E HERE CAUSE OF RAPE/INCEST/INBREEDING And faithlessness..SEEMINGLY REJECTED..EVEN by our own creationists...AS MUCH AS THOSE WHO REJECTED GOD..[ALL ON FAith]

its taken a few pages..BUT
BEgin with this

http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html

it hasnt yet gotten to the hammy bit
BUT REFUTES HYBRID AS ALL Being STERILE..
and noting this is his aREA OF Specialty..[he knows his stuff]
yet explains IT SIMPLY..IN MANY PAGES..BUT ONE Step at a time[in previous pages he explains darwin never went that far[ape /man]..that was huxly..THE BULL-DOG..[THE GODLESS ONE]

anyhow the heading here..seems prophetic
LOOK At how far we came.

HAMMY CREATION..INDEED..WE COME FROM A PIG..
no one wants to know that..so refute it if you can..oh sons of man.

OUG makes the plea to me "but..please/this tIME../hang around..and talk
DONT/RUN..AWAY..LIKE,..ALL THE/OTHERS."

Let me point out a few facts to you old chap. You build so many straw men of science that it is obvious you will never understand what science claims and what it doesn't claim. The majority of your posts [where they are decipherable from mumbo-jumbo, superstitious twaddle, dyslexic discontinuities and illogical drivel] comprise construction of numerous strawmen for you to joust at like a modern Don Quixote astride a sway-back Rocinante, but you are a pathetic caricature of the reality.

It is not my burden to educate you in any of the sciences. While you offend against common sense and reason and if the inclination leads me I will comment on the more outrageous examples of your fractured reasoning. When I do it will be for me a pleasant diversion from the serious arguments about society, the sciences, sex, politics and history. You are entirely responsible for this for you cannot be taken seriously. As an advocate for your brand of lunacy you are an abject failure.

I usually appreciate confronting creationism but have not engaged thus for some years. But first you must learn what is and what is not science and learn what science does and does not do. So far you are hopelessly out of touch and not worth much more of my attention.