Tag: Nature (journal)

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
July 28, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Human Origins and Anthropology
Psychology
Tagged
, __trending, 1 percent myth, animals, apes, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus africanus, Casey Luskin, chimpanzees, cruelty, Death in the Afternoon, Dogs, Donald Trump, Ernest Hemingway, gorillas, human exceptionalism, human origins, humans, Jim Banks, Journal of Human Evolution, Lucy, National Museum of Natural History, Nature (journal), New York Post, paleoanthropologists, people, psychology, Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Smithsonian Institution, wokeness}

Luskin in the NY Post Calls Out Smithsonian on Human Origins

_{David Klinghoffer
July 28, 2025

Evolution, Human Origins and Anthropology, Psychology

4}

The museum misinforms visitors about how humans are so very, very close to non-human creatures. Equating humans with non-humans isn't humane. It's the opposite. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
July 24, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Human Origins and Anthropology
Intelligent Design
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, Casey Luskin, chimps, common ancestor, common ancestry, Creation Myths, Daniel Stern Cardinale, DNA, Erika DeBenedictis, evolution, gap divergence, genetic similarity, gibbon, Gone with the Wind, gorillas, Gutsick Gibbon, human origins, humans, intelligent design, National Museum of Natural History, Nature (journal), Plato's Revenge, Richard Sternberg, Smithsonian Institution, Trump Administration, YouTube videos}

As Luskin Debunks 1 Percent Myth, Evolutionists Fire Wildly in Response

_{David Klinghoffer
July 24, 2025

Evolution, Human Origins and Anthropology, Intelligent Design

4}

The myth matters because a toxic lie being advanced in our culture denies the exceptional status of human beings in nature. Many evils follow from that denial. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
June 25, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Genetics
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, apes, chimps, Chimps and Critics (series), deletions, DNA, genes, genetics, genome assemblies, genome sequencing, genomes, humans, insertions, junk DNA, Nature (journal), Supplemental Data, technical failures, telomeres}

Are the New Ape Genomes Reliable?

_{Casey Luskin
June 25, 2025

Evolution, Genetics, Human Origins and Anthropology

4}

We have good reasons to believe that these differences are reliable and real and even represent functional, meaningful DNA. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Denyse O’Leary

Date
June 25, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, Andrew McDiarmid, bonobos, Bornean orangutans, Casey Luskin, chimpanzees, chimps, DNA, genetics, genomes, gorillas, humans, junk DNA, Nature (journal), Pan paniscus, reality, Research, siamangs, Smithsonian Institution, statistics, Sumatran orangutans}

Why Is the 1 Percent Myth So Beloved?

_{Denyse O’Leary
June 25, 2025

Evolution, Human Origins and Anthropology

5}

When a belief conflicts with common sense present-day reality, it is usually upholding an irrational value. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
June 19, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Genetics
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, alignment failure, biological processes, chimps, Chimps and Critics (series), common ancestry, deletions, DNA, gap divergence, genes, genetic differences, genetics, genome, haplotype, humans, insertions, megabases, Nature (journal), repetitive elements, sequence alignment, Supplemental Data, technical problems}

Do Large Genetic Differences Between Humans and Chimps Represent “Technical Failures”?

_{Casey Luskin
June 19, 2025

Evolution, Genetics, Human Origins and Anthropology

3}

The insinuation is that something went wrong in the lab during the attempted alignment process. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
June 18, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Human Exceptionalism
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, __trending, 1 percent myth, chimpanzee genome, chimps, Chimps and Critics (series), Eugenie Scott, evolution, evolutionary genomics, gap divergence, genetics, Haeckel’s embryos, human genome, humans, Icons of Evolution, junk DNA, Nature (journal), non-sex chromosomes, nucleotide, objections, persistent scientific errors, Queen Mary University London, rejoinders, repetitive DNA, Richard Buggs}

Critics Struggle with Evidence Humans and Chimps Are 15 Percent Genetically Different

_{Casey Luskin
June 18, 2025

Evolution, Human Exceptionalism, Human Origins and Anthropology

5}

Before we dive into what critics are saying, I want to note that good authorities have come to similar numerical conclusions as I did. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Klinghoffer

Date
June 13, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Genetics
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, chimp genome, chimpanzees, chimps, common ancestry, common design, computer programmers, Discovery Institute, Donald Trump, Elizabeth Shenk, Evan Eichler, Evolution News, geneticists, human genome, humans, National Museum of Natural History, Nature (journal), signage, Smithsonian Institution, Supplemental Data, taxpayers, University of Washington}

Challenged on the “1 Percent” Myth, Smithsonian Gives a Meaningless Non-Answer

_{David Klinghoffer
June 13, 2025

Evolution, Genetics, Human Origins and Anthropology

3}

Note to President Trump: I find this pretty disrespectful to the people who pay the bills at the Smithsonian. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
David Coppedge

Date
May 29, 2025

Categories
Ethics
Metascience
Science Reporting
Tagged
, accuracy, Alexander Goldberg, artificial intelligence, Blind Man’s Bluff, Christine Coughlin, Dalmeet Singh Chawla, data, data science, evidence, Evolution News, fakery, fallibility, file drawer problem, fraud, generative ai, Gollum Effect, integrity, knowledge, Leipzig, Nancy M. P. King, Nature (journal), objectivity, peer review, PLOS ONE, PNAS, politicization, post-trust, predatory journals, pseudoscience, public trust, Ralf Mrowka, replicability, scientific publishing, scientific reliability, scientists, suppressed evidence, The Conversation, transparency, Wittenberg}

How the “Scientific Community” Undermines Its Own Trustworthiness

_{David Coppedge
May 29, 2025

Ethics, Metascience, Science Reporting

10}

The “file drawer problem” leads invariably to biased reporting. It refers to scientists deciding not to report negative results. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
May 27, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Human Exceptionalism
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, 1 percent myth (series), Casey Luskin, chimpanzees, differential, DNA, evolution, gap divergence, genetic code, genetic difference, genomes, Gorilla gorilla, gorillas, human exceptionalism, human origins, humans, intelligent design, National Museum of Natural History, Nature (journal), orangutans, Pan troglodytes, Pongo abelii, primates, Progressive Cactus, signage, single nucleotide variation, Smithsonian Institution, Supplemental Data, telomere, University of Johannesburg}

Letter to the Smithsonian

_{Casey Luskin
May 27, 2025

Evolution, Human Exceptionalism, Human Origins and Anthropology

9}

Unfortunately, the 1 percent myth is promulgated as fact at, among other places, the nation's own Smithsonian Institution. Read More ›

^{Type
post

Author
Casey Luskin

Date
May 27, 2025

Categories
Evolution
Human Exceptionalism
Human Origins and Anthropology
Tagged
, 1 percent myth, 1 percent myth (series), ape genomes, autosomes, biologists, biology, chimpanzees, chromosomes, common descent, diploidal genome, gap divergence, genome, genomic analysis, genomic differences, haploid, human exceptionalism, human genome, humans, Nature (journal), non-sex chromosomes, nucleotides, Progressive Cactus, Research, sex chromosomes, single nucleotide variations, software, Supplementary Data}

Additional Method of Analysis Confirms Human-Chimp Genomes Are About 15 Percent Different

_{Casey Luskin
May 27, 2025

Evolution, Human Exceptionalism, Human Origins and Anthropology

6}

This number is only looking at the non-sex chromosomes. When you look at the sex chromosomes, the differences seem to be even greater. Read More ›