WE WORRY that you might not have enough serious reading material for the weekend. Therefore, we went searching at the highly esteemed creationist website of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). Our search was rewarded, and thus we bring you: Chimps and People Show ‘Architectural’ Genetic Design.
The article begins in a most reassuring manner. The bold is added by us:
An international team of geneticists recently set out to explore in more detail the evolutionary relationship between humans and chimpanzees. Despite their assumption that man and chimp share a common ancestor, their findings are actually more consistent with the creation model.
What findings were those? Be patient. As is customary among creation scientists, like those at ICR, their research consists of reading about research, and then re-interpreting the results. They tell us:
In the study, which was published in the November 2008 issue of the journal Genome Research, the geneticists compared the genomes of 30 chimpanzees with those of 30 central African humans.
Okay, what was learned? Is it really true that — gasp! — we’re related to apes? The study involved vital regions of DNA that are relatively resistant to change. The ICR article says:
How does the cell “know” how to protect itself in this manner? According to the evolutionary model, it is the result of non-directed natural selection. According to the creation model, the Creator wisely placed core genes in regions of chromosomes that are much more stable. Conversely, it seems reasonable that the same Creator placed other genes in more volatile regions of chromosomes for the purpose of allowing more variety and survivability in succeeding generations.
How convenient! How farsighted and benevolent! But there’s more. As the creation scientists work their way through the research paper, they found the smoking gun! We read:
At one point in their Genome Research report, the investigators referred to the chromosomal arrangement of CNVs [copy number variations] as “sequence motifs or architectures.” “Architecture” logically suggests an architect.
Aha! There it is, right in the middle of a peer-reviewed paper! It’s so obvious. Architecture suggests an architect! Having found what they were looking for, the article concludes as follows:
It would make sense that a Master Architect fashioned these attributes—some unique to chimpanzees, some unique to humans, and others quite similar in both—in genomes so that each group could better survive the different diseases it might encounter. These genetic “architectures” provide evidence for purposeful design and are more consistent with being the products of an all-knowing God as the Bible describes, rather than the products of indiscriminate nature.
Relax! You ain’t no kin to no monkey.
Addendum: For those who want a bit more information, here’s the abstract of the Genome Research paper ICR is talking about. You’ll need a subscription to read the whole paper: Copy number variation and evolution in humans and chimpanzees.
Copyright © 2008. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.
The Sensuous Curmudgeon 
You recall the old Creationist canard, “If people evolved from apes, why are there still apes?” It seems to me it’s the other way around. If people were Created, why are there apes at all? I mean, if Man stood alone, with no animals similar to him in existence or in the fossil record, it would be strong evidence for having been Created outright. Instead, evolution would predict similar, closely related forms, both extant and extinct. And what do you know — there they are! Can the Creationists explain the existence of the banana boys? Aren’t gorillas and chimps closer to us than a lot of species are to each other that the Creationists assign to the same “kinds” or “baramins”? If Man was made in God’s image, were chimps made in sort of God’s image? This particular crack in the Creationist wall didn’t start with Darwin. I’d take it at least as far back as Linnaeus classifying Man and the apes as being both Primates (he invented the term) on the basis of their apparent similarities in the mid 1700s. Similarities imply relatedness, relatedness implies common ancestry, common ancestry implies changes over time to result in different forms… which is Evolution, right?
“If people were Created, why are there apes at all?”
That got me wondering if apes are even mentioned in the bible. I found an online, searchable version here: King James Bible Online. “Monkey” isn’t mentioned, but there are two references to “apes” as follows:
1 Kings 10:22
For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
2 Chronicles 9:21
For the king’s ships went to Tarshish with the servants of Huram: every three years once came the ships of Tarshish bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks.
I assume both of those passages are much later than Genesis, so it’s possible that when Genesis was written down, those people had never seen an ape.
Another question is raised by the creationist reinterpretation. If a creator took the time and trouble to protect certain genes to allow cells to survive disease better, and if said creator is infinite in wisdom, love, and power, then why did the creator not go the whole way and eliminate disease altogether? Or while he was tinkering with our DNA with such precision and care, why not give us an immune system that never fails and a genome that automatically repairs itself, especially in the case of the numerous horrific congenital illnesses that we are subject to.