How does the creationist accept that a DNA test shows they're related to their father but reject that a DNA test shows they're related to a chimp? [Spirituality & Religion]

@GodSpeed63
Yes, but you don’t believe in science, so why do you believe it’s different ?
No where in the Bible does Jesus mention DNA

@GodSpeed63 The DNA is all living things is exactly the same. The genes in chimps and humans are slightly different.

That’s because chimps aren’t humans

@GodSpeed63


And your genes are different from your parents and still more different from your grandparents but we still accept that a DNA test shows relatedness between you.
That same test shows that you're related to a chimpanzee.

So again, at what point can you claim that DNA is no longer showing relatedness but a common designer and how do you justify that claim?

@DocSavage
I don't believe in your type of science which is false science.

@Pikachu
Not a chance, the flesh of an ape is way different from the flesh of a human. Plus the code in the DNA of a chimp is way different from the code in the DNA of a Human being.

, @GodSpeed63
there's what ,a 96% match ? granted the remaining 4% makes a difference.But it tells us a lot

@GodSpeed63
and what exactly is your type of science ? last time I checked Ken Ham doesn't have a degree in bio physics or genetics. If you wanted info on something like DNA, wouldn't it be practical to ask someone who actually Studied it ?

@GodSpeed63
So both you and Carazaa both admit that you are lying. You trust the science only as far as you need to make your claim. But when the evidence goes against you. The experts got it wrong.

@GodSpeed63 Also you need to include bonobos too. They’re just as closely related to humans.

Once the ancestors of humans split from the ancestor of bonobos and chimps more than 4 million years ago, the common ancestor of bonobos and chimps retained this diversity until their population completely split into two groups 1 million years ago. The groups that evolved into bonobos, chimps, and humans all retained slightly different subsets of this ancestral population's diverse gene pool—and those differences now offer clues today to the size and range of diversity in that ancestral group.

While the function of the small differences in DNA in the three lineages today is not yet known, the Max Planck team sees clues that some may be involved in parts of the genome that regulate immune responses, tumor suppression genes, and perception of social cues. The common chimpanzee, for example, shows selection for a version of a gene that may be involved in fighting retroviruses, such as HIV—a genetic variant not found in humans or bonobos, which may explain why chimps get a milder strain of HIV (called simian immunodeficiency virus) than humans do. Another difference is that bonobos and humans, but not chimps, have a version of a protein found in urine that may have similar function in apes as it does in mice, which detect differences in scent to pick up social cues.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/06/bonobos-join-chimps-closest-human-relatives

@GodSpeed63



Won't wash. Your genetic code is different from your parents and still more different from your grandparents and still more different from people from your racial background.
And yet in those circumstances you agree that a DNA test is showing relatedness as family and in heritage.

It's the exact same comparison which shows it's more similar between you and a chimp than it is between you and a gorilla. And more similar between you and a gorilla than you and a horse.

So again, at what point can you claim that DNA is no longer showing relatedness but a common designer and how do you justify that claim?

@Pikachu
Not buying your explanation. It's obvious that the flesh of a chimp differs from that of a human being. Even though that the DNA is basically the same in all living matter, the code in each strand is different from the code in other strands.

@GodSpeed63


Certainly it differs but this is not a rebuttal, do you see? Because the argument is not that Chimps and humans are the same, it's that we're genetically related.

So let's see if we can just get a straight, simple answer to the question:

If DNA shows you're related to your parents and more distantly to your cousins and more distantly to people of the same racial heritage and down the line to chimpanzees, at which point do you decide that the DNA no longer shows relatedness and how do you justify that cutoff point?

That's what i need you to answer.

@Pikachu
True science says otherwise.

@GodSpeed63
How the Fuck would you know ?

@GodSpeed63 So your creationist claim is that chimps and humans are not genetically related,.

Let’s examine that, shall we?

@newjaninev2
Now you're learning.

@GodSpeed63 so I take it that, yes, you’d like to examine the evidence that chimps and humans are genetically related.

Let’s begin, and let’s see how long it takes you to run away

@GodSpeed63 Do you have an understanding of DNA? Do you know that DNA is made up of nucleotides arranged in base pairs?

We will be using those terms, so we need to agree that you understand them.

We have plenty of time, so there’s no need to rush. Is there anything 'DNA is made up of nucleotides arranged in base pairs' about which you’re unsure?

@newjaninev2
Do you?

@newjaninev2
He still has trouble spelling it.

@GodSpeed63
Yes, of course. I’m an educated adult in a developed society.

The question was... do you have an understanding of DNA?

I note you still haven’t answered that question

@GodSpeed63 well... do you have an understanding of DNA?

@DocSavage
Doesn't matter, a chimp will always be a chimp and a human will always be a human. None are related.

@newjaninev2
Then, why is the so called 'developed society' trying to kill itself off?


Gathering from our conversations, better than you do.

@GodSpeed63
Judging for your post, you haven’t got a clue.