hmmm... apparently all humans are 99.4% chimpanzee...
it was on teh televisuals last night- about whether chimps deserve the same rights as humans or not.

hi (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/chimps/vote/) <beware contains sound- quiz to see if you're a chimp or not.

what do you think???

Old news is so exciting..

I also don't think this is a matter of opinion.

I'm chimp, but I already knew that...

Humans aren't 99.4% Chimpanzee, just their DNA's are 99.4% the same. Humans also share about 60% of their DNA with Bananas.

Humans aren't 99.4% Chimpanzee, just their DNA's are 99.4% the same. Humans also share about 60% of their DNA with Bananas.
This is indeed a useless test.

Humans aren't 99.4% Chimpanzee, just their DNA's are 99.4% the same. Humans also share about 60% of their DNA with Bananas.Actually we don't share 99.4% of our DNA with chimps, we share about 99.4% of our crucial DNA with chimps. It's all done to make them look even more similar.

And no they shouldn't - they are a different species and while some are more intelligent than people I've known, they live in an entirely different society.

Whether or not they're an intelligent species, they really shouldn't get the same rights as people, they're just so different in terms of society and nature.

Untill chimps' contribute to our society they may not take part of it.

:rolleyes: They can't talk so, I dont want chimps all over the town... :mad:

Can anyone seriously imagine a chimp walking down the street with a briefcase going off to work?

If so, put those pills down.

Can anyone seriously imagine a chimp walking down the street with a briefcase going off to work?

If so, put those pills down.
Go read The Planet of the Apes.

Someone should get MonkeyForAHead in on this ;).

Can anyone seriously imagine a chimp walking down the street with a briefcase going off to work?

If so, put those pills down.

It's more like you're in a desperate need of thoose pills. You have no imagination at all, and that can't be healthy.

It's more like you're in a desperate need of thoose pills. You have no imagination at all, and that can't be healthy.You really believe chimps can do that?

It's easier to believe chimps can do that than it is to believe you can't imagine they can.

You really believe chimps can do that?

Beleive? No. But you said "imagine".

Can anyone seriously imagine a chimp walking down the street with a briefcase going off to work?. .

How could any work of fiction or art be created if nobody had the ability to take their imagination seriously?

Just look at Worms... Worms battleing in teams with weapons... crazy. Surely the people at Team17 are insane lunatics who can't seperate imagination from everyday reality?

If you actually read my post enough to understand it then I might be more inclined to reply with a proper post.

We're just being pedantic.

You asked if anyone could "imagine" something, implying they couldn't (via rhetoric), when in actual fact anyone can.

"seriously imagine" in the context it was written is oximoronic, so either argument is equally true or false.

Humans are closer related to orangutans than to chimps.

Humans are closer related to orangutans than to chimps.Nope. We are more closely related to gorillas than orangutans.

http://www.fairchildgarden.org/EduProfDev/Images/cladogram_human.jpg

Huh, I tought they had the same rights already... How did Bush get to be President then?:confused:

Huh, I tought they had the same rights already... How did Bush get to be President then?:confused:
Rofl! good one!

Orang-Utangs are big fat and ugly... i don't wanna be like them.

Rofl! good one!

Orang-Utangs are big fat and ugly... i don't wanna be like them.Just make sure the Librarian of Unseen University isn't in the room when you say that in future...

Actually we don't share 99.4% of our DNA with chimps, we share about 99.4% of our crucial DNA with chimps.How's "crucial DNA" defined, then? Exons only?

Well we have plenty of junk DNA at the end of our chromosomes called telomeres which gradually disappear through cell relplication. Presumably this DNA is slightly different and using the percentage for the total DNA would probably be less and therefore less of a "headline". People will fiddle with results to make them sound more impressive as people often miss out key words because they assume they are unneccesary.

telomeresAre those the same things as introns, or are they a sub-class of intron?

Are those the same things as introns, or are they a sub-class of intron?
Neither of those.
It's a redundant, repetitive region at the end enabling the DNA polymerase complex to replicate till the end of the chromosome.

Nope. We are more closely related to gorillas than orangutans.Oh.

Whoops.

Only about 1.5% of our DNA actually codes for protein (exons). The rest tends to be called junk DNA when infact a lot of it is very useful - We have the genes to grow hair but it doesn't just randomly grow on our head and other places, it deliberately does that. Other organisms like saccharomyces cerevisiae have a higher percentage of DNA that codes for protein. We have about 1% difference in our DNA that codes for protein when compared to chimps (presumably this must be the 99.4% figure they are using) and about 3% difference in the "junk" DNA. AFAIK the junk DNA mainly consists of introns. Feel free to correct me if necessary.

I heard that chimps have a disease that is fairly harmless to them (so many of them have it) but is deadly to humans.
So I, for one, don't want monkeys elevated to social status.

Monkeys are over-rated, anyway.

Some humans are closer to gorillas that others.:rolleyes:

Are those the same things as introns, or are they a sub-class of intron?I've had 2 genetics lectures so far and 1 of them was an introduction. There was a handy slide on one of the presentations but the Biology server is being sorted out so I can't access the shared drive to get it yet. What I do remember though was that 48Mb of 3200Mb were protein coding genes, some were pseudogenes. ie. they no longer work because there's no start or end triplet so that would count as junk. There was a lot of other things too (infact they made up most of the DNA). I'll try and get hold of it asap. My lectures however seem to be starting off with bacterial DNA.