First of all, how notably subjugating is the thought that a group of scientists has scientific dissent with regards to evolution. The defiant consensus on it is rather effervescent on the furtherance of creationism. With such dissent embarked on questioning the already established facts, it rather bedazzled, bemuddled evolution as by the notion of re-analysis due to the fact that there developed skepticism on the subject matter.
On matters of critical analogy, i came about with a hypothesis. How on earth did genetics determine a common ancestor between apes and humans when ancestral dna percentage on a person diminished through time?
How much dna percentage does a son inherits from his father?
Accdg to Bill Spencer, a geneticist and genomicist:
There are many ways to answer “how much DNA”.
- How many chromosomes?
- How many base pairs?
- How much mass? (different base pairs don’t weigh the same)
- How many genes?
Let’s look* at the base pairs (bp) in autosomal, X, Y, and mitochondrial DNA.
- 2,875,001,522 bp Autosomal DNA from each parent (chromosomes 1–22)
- 156,040,895 bp X chromosome (from mother to son)
- 57,227,415 bp Y chromosome (from father to son) (1/3 the size of X)
- 16,569 bp Mitochondrial DNA (from mother to son) (very tiny)
This gives us:
49.1713% = 2,932,228,937 bp from Father to Son (22+Y)
50.8287% = 3,031,058,986 bp from Mother to Son (22+X+mtDNA)
Note: Total nuclear DNA is:
- 6,062,084,834 female (2*22 + XX)
- 5,963,271,354 male (2*22+XY)
which makes female DNA 1.657% longer than male DNA, due to X bigger than Y.
Note: Though he has fewer base pairs, the male has more genes than the female! One of the female’s X chromosomes in each cell is “turned off”, becoming a Barr Body. That way, each human has exactly one single X chromosome making its proteins and ncRNAs. But the male also has a Y chromosome, adding an estimated 50–60 protein-coding genes** that females do not have. Additionally, some genes on the Y chromosome control genes on other chromosomes, so Y has a larger impact than just the genes physically on Y.
All these numbers are for the consensus human – that is, a typical average one, not counting people with less common combinations of X and Y chromosomes, or genetic translocation, or greatly longer or shorter repeated DNA than average, etc.
* These numbers are the Primary Assembly lengths from the Assembly Statistics for GRCh38.p2. A year and a half old, but close enough.
** US National Library of Medicine:
For example, through genetics it could be established that two individuals are related through the percentage of dna traces from a parental dna on a son such that it can determine paternal descent or a father and son relationship. A father and son relationship could be traced through dna traces of a parent on his son say 49.1713%. Science tells us that a particular people have 2% neanderthal dna on them. If the closest relationship is father and son, having a parent dna on his son at 49.1713%, a neanderthal ancestor has its dna on modern humans to be at 2% then clearly, there is diminished dna percentage of ancestral genes on a person. Neanderthal lives 40,000 years ago. So if it takes 40,000 years for a 49.1713% dna traces to be diminished to 2%, dont you think such dna traces couldnt vanish after it takes on a longer duration, say, 100, 000 years?
If ancestral dna traces vanished, how could genetics trace a common ancestor between apes and humans?