Chimps and humans: How similar are we really?

[pshun2404]

We have recently found 1,307 orphan genes that are completely different between humans and chimpanzees, and these from just four areas of tissue samples. We can only imagine the vast numbers of differences that will be revealed once more areas of the anatomy and physiology are analyzed (see J. Ruiz-Orera, 2015, “Origins of De Novo Genes in Humans and Chimpanzees�, PLoS Genetics. 11 (12): e1005721)

Orphan genes, as many here know, are found only particular lineages of creature or sometimes only in a specific species or variety within a species. What is really interesting is they appear to no have evolutionary history. Despite that we have come to know these genes are incredibly important! Their expression often dictates very specific qualities and processes allowing for specialized adaptations of particular tissues, like the antisense gene, NCYM, which is over-expressed in neuroblastoma; this gene inhibits the activity of glycogen synthase kinase 3β (GSK3β), which targets NMYC for degradation (Suenaga Y, Islam SMR, Alagu J, Kaneko Y, Kato M, et al. (2014) NCYM, a Cis-antisense gene of MYCN, encodes a de novo evolved protein that inhibits GSK3β resulting in the stabilization of MYCN in human neuroblastomas. PLoS Genet 10: e1003996. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003996). Some contribute to specific proteins unique only to that species or to varieties within a species.

This genetic curiosity has been being studied for around 20 years with little insight as to why they are there at all (where did they come from), and we are just beginning to see how they function, but the doubted thousands of additional differences this will add to the human/chimp difference scenario is staggering.

Any thoughts?

[Mr.Badham]

[Replying to post 15 by pshun2404]

chimp kind is only found in Africa? Chimp kind is only found in a very small part of Africa.They don't adapt as well as humans do. That's the most important difference. Our ability to adapt. They're stuck, and will probably die out because of it.

[pshun2404]

Good point. Why would the divergence into humans (found in at least three possible points of origin far from each other) and chimps (in such a limited region) not be found supported elsewhere. IF the story we are told is correct then this limited region would have to be the source location for both creatures when they allegedly were one.

So are you saying chimp attempts to migrate failed? Do we see evidence they even tried? I mean, its a good explanation but what is the data and what is the narrative?

But even sequentially similar genes in the embryonic stem cells of humans vs chimps, though found in the same order, combine and function in very different ways (Maria C. N. Marchetto, “Differential L1 Regulation in Pluripotent Stem cells in humans and apes�, Nature, Vol. 503, Issue 7477, 2013). Why would one creature diverge in such different ways?

Now the same thing is being found to be true in the areas once thought to be “junk� or mere non-functional leftovers from ancient ancestors. Actually this area is quite active and not only plays an important role in the life of each and every creature, but also in disease. But again, sequentially similar areas function very differently and demonstrate different purpose in these two different creatures. In this area chimps and humans are different in about 20% of the cases viewed. That's way larger than 1 or 2%.

According to the researchers this difference effects many systems, and many functions, from the higher levels of expression (in the humans) that “repress the movement of the retrotransposons, to gene expressions related to triggering developmental pathways, responding to environmental stimuli, even adapting to new food sources.�

Just a few more differences to consider...

[H.sapiens]

Good point. Why would the divergence into humans (found in at least three possible points of origin far from each other) and chimps (in such a limited region) not be found supported elsewhere. IF the story we are told is correct then this limited region would have to be the source location for both creatures when they allegedly were one.

There is no evidence of three separate points of origin, the remains of three distinct lineages within the genus Homo have been found in many different locations (one of the three in just one, to date). That is hardly the same thing.

So are you saying chimp attempts to migrate failed? Do we see evidence they even tried? I mean, its a good explanation but what is the data and what is the narrative?

If there had been a failed attempt why would there be evidence? If you tried to cross the highway to get to the store and were hit by a truck, there would be no clear evidence that you were trying to get to the store. But anyway, chimps do not appear to be very adaptable so I'd expect that they'd get hit by that apocryphal truck pretty close to home.

But even sequentially similar genes in the embryonic stem cells of humans vs chimps, though found in the same order, combine and function in very different ways (Maria C. N. Marchetto, “Differential L1 Regulation in Pluripotent Stem cells in humans and apes�, Nature, Vol. 503, Issue 7477, 2013). Why would one creature diverge in such different ways?

Because the divergence increases that creature's fitness ... that should be obvious.

Now the same thing is being found to be true in the areas once thought to be “junk� or mere non-functional leftovers from ancient ancestors. Actually this area is quite active and not only plays an important role in the life of each and every creature, but also in disease. But again, sequentially similar areas function very differently and demonstrate different purpose in these two different creatures. In this area chimps and humans are different in about 20% of the cases viewed. That's way larger than 1 or 2%.

The junk DNA concept has always been suspect, much like claim that you only use a small part of your brain.

The absolute numbers for similar DNA are irrelevant and may be manipulated up and down with different sets of assumptions. The important thing is that all of the resulting cladograms are the same, as long as you keep the assumptions constant (and separate) for each analysis.

According to the researchers this difference effects many systems, and many functions, from the higher levels of expression (in the humans) that “repress the movement of the retrotransposons, to gene expressions related to triggering developmental pathways, responding to environmental stimuli, even adapting to new food sources.�

"Higher levels of expression" for smaller actual changes just makes a case for faster and more driven evolution, it runs counter to what I believe you want to argue.

[pshun2404]

Besides the review by Gagneux and Vark which describes a whole list of genetic differences between humans and the great apes (despite their adaptation of the data to fit the historical narrative). The differences include ‘cytogenetic differences, differences in the type and number of repetitive genomic DNA and transposable elements, abundance and distribution of endogenous retroviruses, the presence and extent of allelic polymorphisms, specific gene inactivation events, gene sequence differences, gene duplications, single nucleotide polymorphisms, gene expression differences, and messenger RNA splicing variations. See Gagneux, P. and Varki, A. 2001. ‘Genetic differences between humans and great apes.’ Mol Phylogenet Evol 18:2-13.

For one example, again let us consider the Y chromosome. Many markers simply do not line up between the human and chimpanzee (Archidiacono, N., Storlazzi, C.T., Spalluto, C., Ricco, A.S., Marzella, R., Rocchi, M. 1998. ‘Evolution of chromosome Y in primates.’ Chromosoma 107:241-246). This again, is very important because my Y chromosome (inherited from my father) is the same as the one he inherited from his father, and so on back through time. And this human (not chimp) Y chromosome demonstrates ultimately they (chimps and humans) came from different patrilineal source creatures.

In addition, Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed “large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.� They found a number of regions that “might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage� (Fujiyama, A., Watanabe, H., Toyoda, A., Taylor, T.D., Itoh, T., Tsai, S.F., Park, H.S., Yaspo, M.L., Lehrach, H., Chen, Z., Fu, G., Saitou, N., Osoegawa, K., de Jong, P.J., Suto, Y., Hattori, M., and Sakaki, Y. 2002. ‘Construction and analysis of a Human-Chimpanzee Comparative Clone Map.’ Science 295:131-134), but they may NOT BE insertions, but ever present distinctions. To really call these "insertions" one would have to have examples of the species existing without them and now with them (which we do not have). We must separate the narrative and just look at the data.

[H.sapiens]

Besides the review by Gagneux and Vark which describes a whole list of genetic differences between humans and the great apes (despite their adaptation of the data to fit the historical narrative). The differences include ‘cytogenetic differences, differences in the type and number of repetitive genomic DNA and transposable elements, abundance and distribution of endogenous retroviruses, the presence and extent of allelic polymorphisms, specific gene inactivation events, gene sequence differences, gene duplications, single nucleotide polymorphisms, gene expression differences, and messenger RNA splicing variations. See Gagneux, P. and Varki, A. 2001. ‘Genetic differences between humans and great apes.’ Mol Phylogenet Evol 18:2-13.

For one example, again let us consider the Y chromosome. Many markers simply do not line up between the human and chimpanzee (Archidiacono, N., Storlazzi, C.T., Spalluto, C., Ricco, A.S., Marzella, R., Rocchi, M. 1998. ‘Evolution of chromosome Y in primates.’ Chromosoma 107:241-246). This again, is very important because my Y chromosome (inherited from my father) is the same as the one he inherited from his father, and so on back through time. And this human (not chimp) Y chromosome demonstrates ultimately they (chimps and humans) came from different patrilineal source creatures.

In addition, Scientists have prepared a human-chimpanzee comparative clone map of chromosome 21 in particular. They observed “large, non-random regions of difference between the two genomes.� They found a number of regions that “might correspond to insertions that are specific to the human lineage� (Fujiyama, A., Watanabe, H., Toyoda, A., Taylor, T.D., Itoh, T., Tsai, S.F., Park, H.S., Yaspo, M.L., Lehrach, H., Chen, Z., Fu, G., Saitou, N., Osoegawa, K., de Jong, P.J., Suto, Y., Hattori, M., and Sakaki, Y. 2002. ‘Construction and analysis of a Human-Chimpanzee Comparative Clone Map.’ Science 295:131-134), but they may NOT BE insertions, but ever present distinctions. To really call these "insertions" one would have to have examples of the species existing without them and now with them (which we do not have). We must separate the narrative and just look at the data.

No one is arguing that are significant differences between humans and chimps, that is to be expected. The point is that there is more difference between humans and gorillas that between humans and chimps; and yet greater difference between humans and orangs, etc.

[pshun2404]

Definitely true

[pshun2404]

So one being so "different" (actually more differences than similarities) does not necessitate one coming from the other OR that both share a common ancestor.

Now either may be true, but the evidence clearly does not preclude or necessitate this...this is "the constructed historical narrative" as Mayr's called it.

Can anyone at least concede to this point? And remember it does not say this is NOT how it happened....

[H.sapiens]

So one being so "different" (actually more differences than similarities) does not necessitate one coming from the other OR that both share a common ancestor.

Now either may be true, but the evidence clearly does not preclude or necessitate this...this is "the constructed historical narrative" as Mayr's called it.

Can anyone at least concede to this point? And remember it does not say this is NOT how it happened....

No. Once you study the similarities, anatomical, genetic (both gross and fine, not to mention Functional Transposons etc.), physiological, immunological, etc. there is no doubt left. The deniers rarely even fully understand one leg of the supporting information and are mostly ignorant of any of the others.

[acehighinfinity]

[Replying to post 3 by Divine Insight]

LOL yeah I can see your tail? Common ancestor from your book of lies?

[Willum]

Welp, legends and reports of half-man half-chimpanzee, have been, disgustingly, mind, circulating for a long time.

The humanzee has identical proof to anything you can show me the justifies the Bible.
Maybe more:

http://www.celebtricity.com/1st-ever-hu ... in-guyana/

Also, Oliver has never been completely debunked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_%2 ... ic_testing

Does this answer the question?