Sobre a semelhança genética de 99% entre chimpanzés e humanos
Os genomas de chimpanzés e humanos são 99% semelhantes! Este é o meme darwiniano repetido ad nauseam na Grande Mídia, sem considerar outras pesquisas que contrariam este mantra dogmático. Considere-se as seguintes publicações científicas:
1. Esta semelhança já foi chamada de mito na Science 29 June 2007
2. As evidências contrárias a esta semelhança de 99% está cada vez mais aparecendo na publicações científicas como a Nature 463 536-539, 28 January 2010
3. O geneticista Richard Buggs tem refletido sobre esta questão científica, e predisse que “quando nós tivermos um genoma de chimpanzé completo e confiável, a semelhança geral com o genoma humano vai se provar próxima dos 70% (muito distante dos 99%).
“To compare the two [human and chimpanzee] genomes, the first thing we must do is to line up the parts of each genome that are similar. When we do this alignment, we discover that only 2400 million of the human genome's 3164.7 million 'letters' align with the chimpanzee genome - that is, 76% of the human genome. Some scientists have argued that the 24% of the human genome that does not line up with the chimpanzee genome is useless "junk DNA". However, it now seems that this DNA could contain over 600 protein-coding genes, and also code for functional RNA molecules.
Looking closely at the chimpanzee-like 76% of the human genome, we find that to make an exact alignment, we often have to introduce artificial gaps in either the human or the chimp genome. These gaps give another 3% difference. So now we have a 73% similarity between the two genomes.
In the neatly aligned sequences we now find another form of difference, where a single 'letter' is different between the human and chimp genomes. These provide another 1.23% difference between the two genomes. Thus, the percentage difference is now at around 72%.
We also find places where two pieces of human genome align with only one piece of chimp genome, or two pieces of chimp genome align with one piece of human genome. This "copy number variation" causes another 2.7% difference between the two species. Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%.”
4. A construção de árvores filogenéticas baseadas em diversos genes existe a possibilidade de sub-árvores filogenéticas entrarem em conflito.
Perelman et al., "A Molecular Phylogeny of Living Primates," PLoS Genetics, Vol. 7(3):e1001342 (March, 2011).
5. A arqueologia genética demonstra que nós somos mais assemelhados com os orangotangos do que com chimpanzés (uma espécie mais distante dos humanos). Publicado na Genome Research:
6. As árvores filogenéticas são baseadas na pressuposição simples de que o grau de semelhança genética reflete o grau de relação evolucionária. Um artigo destaca isso:
“molecular systematics is (largely) based on the assumption, first clearly articulated by Zuckerkandl and Pauling (1962), that degree of overall similarity reflects degree of relatedness. This assumption derives from interpreting molecular similarity (or dissimilarity) between taxa in the context of a Darwinian model of continual and gradual change. Review of the history of molecular systematics and its claims in the context of molecular biology reveals that there is no basis for the 'molecular assumption.' ... For historians and philosophers of science the questions that arise are how belief in the infallibility of molecular data for reconstructing evolutionary relationships emerged, and how this belief became so central ...
7. Mais dados genéticos estão contradizendo a filogenia evolucionária padrão de humanos e macacos. Um artigo publicado no Molecular Biology and Evolution, em 2007, afirma:
“For about 23% of our genome, we share no immediate genetic ancestry with our closest living relative, the chimpanzee. This encompasses genes and exons to the same extent as intergenic regions. We conclude that about 1/3 of our genes started to evolve as human-specific lineages before the differentiation of human, chimps, and gorillas took place”.
O status epistêmico da semelhança entre os genomas de chimpanzés e humanos demanda mais pesquisas, pois a questão ainda não está definida como alardeiam os darwinistas.
