Intelligent Design

[Socratic.Fanatic]

My quotation about chimp-human divergence came from:

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2016/05/stunning_eviden102837.html

And here is the particular excerpt which I found astonishingly incorrect—if not downright dishonest:

@Socratic.Fanatic

First, the high chimp-human genomic similarity was not predicted by common ancestry. No such prediction was made and no such prediction is required by common ancestry. Common ancestry would be just fine with very different levels of similarity from 98-99 percent. In fact, this high similarity makes no sense under evolution, for several of the reasons given above. Swamidass’s claim that this evidence is a stunning confirmation of common ancestry is utterly at odds with the science. It is in stark contrast to the scientific facts."

I’m inviting comment on this shocking position. Can any Discovery Institute supporter explain how they could justify this level of misrepresentation? Even if it started as a statement from ignorance, how can it be allowed to remain on the website uncorrected?

Just as some of the bizarre claims of Henry Morris—and refusal to correct them—led me out of the Young Earth Creationist world of creation science, perhaps I should be thankful that EvolutionNews.org is so reckless with their public displays of science ignorance (if not outright dishonesty.)