Page 198 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences

The exact
relationship
between the
chimp, gorilla
and human

branches is not
quite clear; some re-
sults place the chimp
closer to man than the gorilla,
while others, for instance a recent study
of mitochondrial DNA, suggest that the
ape line branched from the human line be-
fore splitting itself into proto-chimp and
proto-gorilla. 12

In short, data of this kind result in conflicting con-
clusions. Results compatible with preconceptions are
aired in evolutionist publications, and other results are not
mentioned. It is a fact that even evolutionists admit that data from mol-
ecular biology do not square with the claims of human evolution. Dr.
Takahata from the National Institute of Genetics, for instance, says in a
paper called "A Genetic Perspective on the Origin and History of

Humans":
Even with DNA sequence data, we have no direct access to the
processes of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished
past can be achieved only by creative imagination. 13
The fact that molecular analyses conflict with findings in other
areas and represent an insoluble dilemma for so-called human evolu-
tion is well known to the NAS. This is clear from the fact that a paper
called "How reliable are human phylogenetic hypotheses?," published

in the PNAS—the NAS's own publication—on April 25, 2000, states

196