Articles to dispute “Humans evolved from primates”
https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/dna-similarities/if-human-and-chimp-dna-are-so-similar-why-differences/
When studying the human genome and its similarity to that of the chimp, scientists have recently concluded that 96% of our genome is similar. However, most people are unaware that this percent pertains to the regions of our DNA that result in proteins. It seems logical that if a protein performs a certain function in one organism, then that same protein should perform the same function in a variety of organisms. This is evidence for a common designer as much as for a common ancestor. But most of the DNA sequence performs an unknown function and has been largely dismissed as “junk DNA.” However, increasing evidence supports the view that “junk” DNA performs an important role. For example, a recent report unexpectedly found specific sequence patterns in “junk” DNA which scientists have termed “pyknons.”1 It has been suggested that these pyknons may be important in determining when and where proteins are made.
Within this “junk DNA” there may be large differences between man and chimp. The areas of greatest difference appear to involve regions which are structurally different (commonly called “rearrangements”) and areas of heterochromatin (tightly packed DNA).
Here are some other interesting differences between the human and chimp genomes which are often not reported:
- The amount of chimp DNA is 12% larger than what it is in humans.
- Several hundred million bases (individual components of the DNA) of the chimp genome are still unanalyzed.
- In many areas of the DNA sequence, major “rearrangements” seem apparent. These account for perhaps 4–10% dissimilarity between chimps and humans.
- Chimps have 23 chromosomes and humans have only 22 (excluding sex chromosomes for both species).
Thus, the physical and mental differences between humans and chimps are most likely due to the differences in purpose and function of the so-called junk DNA. This understanding should leave us more mindful of the awesome complexity of the Creator and His creation of DNA.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/are-humans-and-chimps-related/
It should be pointed out that most of the DNA sequence performs an unknown function and has been largely dismissed as “junk” DNA.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/ape-man/did-humans-really-evolve-from-apelike-creatures/
Unfortunately, the fossil record of man and apes is very sparse. Approximately 95 percent of all known fossils are marine invertebrates, about 4.7 percent are algae and plants, about 0.2 percent are insects and other invertebrates, and only about 0.1 percent are vertebrates (animals with bones). Finally, only the smallest imaginable fraction of vertebrate fossils consists of primates (humans, apes, monkeys, and lemurs).
Because of the rarity of fossil hominids, even many of those who specialize in the evolution of man have never actually seen an original hominid fossil, and far fewer have ever had the opportunity to handle or study one. Most scientific papers on human evolution are based on casts of original specimens (or even on published photos, measurements, and descriptions of them). Access to original fossil hominids is strictly limited by those who discovered them and is often confined to a few favored evolutionists who agree with the discoverers’ interpretation of the fossil.
Artistic imagination has been used to illustrate entire “apemen” from nothing more than a single tooth. In the early 1920s, the “apeman” Hesperopithecus (which consisted of a single tooth) was pictured in the London Illustrated News complete with the tooth’s wife, children, domestic animals, and cave!.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/piltdown-man/a-century-of-fraud/
For those who believe in the biblical account of history and human origins, the Piltdown man fraud could be considered “the greatest example of evolutionary gullibility of the 20th century.” The faked human skull and orangutan jaw, crudely doctored to look like fossils, were touted as a missing link and proof of human evolution, until they were exposed as a fraud in 1953—about 40 years after their discovery.
https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/dna-similarities/untold-story-behind-dna-similarity/
However, in the case of the chimpanzee sequence, they lacked good genetic resources and funding. So they used the human genome as a framework. They also based this choice on the evolutionary presupposition that humans and chimps evolved from a common ancestor. This is a belief, not a fact of science. The obvious outcome of this approach is that the chimp genome they constructed would be very human-like even if the actual genome is not.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/lucy/lucy-makeover-shouts-a-dangerously-deceptive-message-about-our-supposed-ancestors/
the case for building a brand new look for Lucy on the basis of a single isolated human-looking bone that evolutionary scientists chose to “assign”16 to Australopithecus afarensis seems quite a stretch. The goal, museum officials admit, is to give Lucy and her purported kin a leg up on the evolutionary tree toward a more human-like appearance.
https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/dna-similarities/chimp-genome-sequence-very-different-from-man/
To put this number into perspective, a typical page of text might have 4,000 letters and spaces. It would take 10,000 such full pages of text to equal 40 million letters! So the differences between humans and chimpanzees include ~35 million DNA bases that are different, ~45 million in the human that are absent from the chimp and ~45 million in the chimp that are absent from the human.
Creationists believe that God made Adam directly from the dust of the earth just as the Bible says. Therefore, man and the apes have never had an ancestor in common. However, assuming they did for the sake of analyzing the argument, then 40 million separate mutation events would have had to take place and become fixed in the population in only ~300,000 generations-a problem referred to as “Haldane’s dilemma.” This problem is exacerbated because the authors acknowledge that most evolutionary change is due to neutral or random genetic drift.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/ape-man/if-we-resemble-apes-does-that-mean-we-evolved-from-apes/
Today, evolutionists insist that the underlying similarity of all animals, including man, and our ability to arrange and classify them into groups, is compelling evidence for their progressive evolution from a common ancestor. They insist that there is simply no other thinkable explanation for their similarities. Evolutionists argue further that the degree of similarity between any two animals attests to their degree of evolutionary “relatedness,” and thus how recently they separated from a common ancestor. They are quite certain, for example, that the similarities between apes and humans prove they evolved from a common ape-like ancestor “only” 2 or 3 million years ago
One of the problems with the similarity = evolutionary ancestry axiom is that evolutionists ignore it whenever it doesn’t fit their evolutionary scenarios. There are many instances of remarkable similarities between animals that evolutionists consider to be only distantly related. The eye of the squid, for example, is strikingly similar to the human eye. Sometimes almost the whole body and even the behavior of animals are obviously similar and still evolutionists argue they are not closely related!
Incredibly, evolutionists explain away amazing similarities between animals they consider to be only distantly related by simply invoking “convergent evolution.” Convergent evolution is the unobserved and unexplained process whereby two very different animals independently evolve into two very similar animals by an incredible run of countless lucky mutational coincidences extending over tens of millions of years! It seems that some folks will believe almost anything, as long as it doesn’t appear in the Bible.
Bonus Material:
Single cells are hardly simple cells…
Bonus craziness:
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/primate-midlife-crisis/
Primate psychology is said to imply an evolutionary basis for the human midlife crisis.
The researchers opted not to have the chimpanzees and orangutans in zoos and sanctuaries around the world fill out their own surveys. Instead, they adapted happiness-assessment questionnaires used with humans by having zookeepers and caretakers answer for the apes. For instance, primate caregivers were asked, “How successful do you think the subject (the ape) is in achieving its goals?” and “How happy would (you) be if (you) were the subject for a week?”