Ankerberg Theological Research Institute
with Dr. Kent Hovind
Ankerberg: I can remember as a student, when my science and biology teachers argued that the DNA structure of man and apes is similar and therefore this is supposed to be proof of common ancestry. What about similarity of bone structure and DNA? Dr. Kent Hovind argues that this is really scientific evidence that clearly shows man did not evolve from the apes. Listen:
Hovind: The typical textbooks will say that the evidence that man and apes are related is that they have similar behavior and, of course, I would vouch for that. Some of the students I saw in school certainly behaved like apes. But they’ll also say they have similar DNA structure and that’s supposed to be proof of a common ancestor. Then they find these bones in the ground and they say, “See, this proves this animal was the ancestor of us today.”
I’d like to point out that, first of all, if you find a bone in the ground, all you know is, it died. You don’t know that it had any children, let alone different children. So it really is of course ridiculous to say that we know that this is the ancestor of somebody else because we find these bones in the ground. You can’t prove any of that. As far as behavior, of course, I think that similar behaviors are made because animals came from a common designer and we all live in the same world and you might’ have to eat food and digest it and there may be some behaviors that are similar because we have a common designer.
And as far as the DNA structure, textbooks will say that DNA is evidence for evolution. They say it’s evidence from molecular biology. This textbook says, “Darwin speculated that all forms of life are related. This speculation has been verified.”
Now, hold on just a minute. What they’re going to say is, it’s been verified because of DNA similarities. The human chromosome is incredibly complex. The DNA, or the chromosome as it’s called, is unbelievably complex. The average person has about 50 trillion cells in their body and each of those cells, except for the gametes, contain 46 chromosomes. If you extracted all of the chromosomes out of your body, you would fit into two tablespoons. And yet if you tied them together and stretched them out, it would reach from earth to the moon and back five million times. It is incredibly complex. This DNA code is more complex than all the computer programs ever written by man combined. All contained in two tablespoons. If you typed out this incredible code, when you got done typing, you’d have enough books to fill the Grand Canyon 40 times. That’s just the instructions required to make one person. Unbelievably complex. And, of course, the psalmist said, “I will praise thee for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.” And he didn’t even have a microscope. He didn’t know about DNA but he could still figure out we are incredibly well designed.
As a baby develops inside the mother, it adds cells to its body, about 15,000 cells per minute are added for the entire nine months, each of those containing 46 of these chromosomes with unbelievably complex instructions. Each cell in the human body is more complex than the space shuttle and here the baby is building 15,000 of those every minute. It all comes from this DNA code which they didn’t know about in Darwin’s day but today the scientists are saying that this DNA is evidence that we all came from a common ancestor. Truth of the matter is, if you organize the animals based upon the number of chromosomes, you don’t get anything similar to what they say happened in evolution. The earliest life form, according to the chromosome number, would be the penicillin. They only have two chromosomes. And over billions of years the penicillin turned into a fruit fly with eight. And then the fruit fly slowly evolved, of course, and got some more chromosomes someplace and became either a tomato or a house fly. They both have twelve. If you look at the number of chromosomes, it’s silly to think there is a similarity. If chromosome number means anything, if this DNA really means something, then I would point out that the possum, the redwood tree and the kidney bean all have 22 chromosomes and therefore they are identical triplets-which of course is ridiculous. They’re not identical triplets at all.
They say that apes and humans have similar DNA. The truth of the matter is, the chimpanzee has the same number of chromosomes as the tobacco plant. They both have more than humans have. So the similarity would break down right there.
And the most complex creature in the world, of course, would be the fern. They’ve got 480 chromosomes. So this idea is ridiculous. But this textbook shows the kids a chart and says, “Boys and girls, we are similar to orangutans. We have 96% similarity. That proves a common ancestor 15 million
years ago.” Now, wait a minute. Similarity in chromosomes proves a common designer, not a common ancestor.” It actually doesn’t prove either one. It could be an indication of either one and the fact is, we’ve only analyzed about one percent of human DNA. Only one percent has even been studied. So if you’re pointing out a 99% similarity between chimps and humans and you’ve only studied one percent of the data, I think it’s a little premature to say that this is proof of anything. If there are similarities, I would say this is just as much argument for a common designer. But the students are never presented with this. They’re only told this is evidence for evolution. It looks to me like somebody’s got an agenda they’re trying to push off on the kids. There are no missing links between apes and humans. There are a few similarities. We both have two eyes and two ears because we both have the same designer.