This finding that whole chunks, rather than single DNA letters, separate humans from chimps echoes a study last year which reported human and chimp DNA differed by up to 5%, not the 1.5% assumed previously.
New Scientist, 15 March 2003
The idea that human beings and chimps have close to 100% similarity in their DNA is often claimed to prove that humans evolved from apes. The figures quoted vary: 97%, 98%, or even 99% similarity, depending on who is telling the story. What is the basis for these claims, and do the data mean that there really is not much difference between chimps and people?
Common designer
Firstly, similarity is not necessarily evidence for common ancestry (evolution) but may be due to a common designer (creation). Think about a Porsche and a Volkswagen ‘Beetle car’. They both have air-cooled, flat, horizontally-opposed , 4-cylinder engines in the rear, independent rear suspension, two doors, boot (trunk) in the front, and many other similarities. Why do these two very different cars have so many similarities? Because they had the same designer! Whether similarity is morphological (shape, form) or biochemical is of no consequence to the lack of logic in this argument for evolution.
If humans were entirely different to all other living things, or indeed every living thing was entirely different, would this reveal the creator to us? No! We could logically think that there must have been many creators rather than one. The unity of the creation is testimony to the one who made it all.
If humans were entirely different to all living things, then what would we eat? If we are to eat food to gain nutrients and energy to live, what would we eat if every other organism on Earth were fundamentally different biochemically? How could we digest them and how could we use the amino acids, sugars, etc., if they were different from the ones we have in our bodies? Biochemical similarity is necessary for us to eat! Even in a perfect world where animals and people ate only plants, if animals and humans did not share similar biochemistry, there would have to be separate plant kingdoms for animals and humans to eat.
We know that DNA in cells contains much of the information necessary for the development of an organism. In other words, if two organisms look similar, we would expect there to be some similarity also in their DNA. The DNA of a cow and a whale, two mammals, should be more alike than the DNA of a cow and a bacterium. If it were not so, the whole idea of DNA being the information carrier in living things would have to be questioned. Likewise, humans and apes have many morphological similarities, so we would expect similarities in their DNA. Of all the animals, chimps are most like humans, so we would expect their DNA would be most like human DNA, but not totally like human DNA.
Certain biochemical capacities are common to all living things, so there is even a degree of similarity between the DNA of yeast , for example, and that of human beings. Because human cells can do many of the things that yeast can do, we share similarities in the DNA sequences that code for the enzymes and proteins that do these same jobs in both types of cells. Some of the sequences, for example those that code for the histone proteins, are almost identical.
Batten D., Ham K., Sarfati J., Wieland C., The Answers Book