Luskin still doesn't get how DNA analysis works

https://evolutionnews.org/2025/06/critics-struggle-with-evidence-that-humans-and-chimps-are-15-genetically-different/
ID perps like Luskin have to know by now that they are just lying about the the DNA difference between chimps and humans.  Trying to make something up about the different ways to measure the difference in sequence will never change what the DNA difference has already told us about the evolutionary relationship between chimps and humans.  Denton tried to make a big deal about similarity differences in his first book (Theory in Crisis) when he did an analysis that didn't tell him much of anything about the evolutionary relationships between the taxa that he used at the time.  Really, Denton did the sequence analysis incorrectly and tried to claim that his results indicated that there was something wrong with the theory of evolution.  He found that all his multicellular animal taxa had about the same amino acid sequence difference from yeast.  Just the similarity to an outgroup doesn't tell you much of anything about the evolution of multicellular animals.  All extant lineages had been evolving for the same amount of time since they shared a common ancestor with yeast.  Things like the molecular clock are dependent on there being a relative clock like rate of change, and all the multicellular animal taxa would have been evolving for over half a billion years since their lineages shared a common ancestor with yeast. Chimps and humans would have had the same percent similarity difference with yeast because their sequences are identical and there hasn't been enough time to accumulate any differences in the time that they have been evolving as independent lineages.  Chimps and humans share the same lineage that has been evolving since it separate from the common ancestor with yeast.  Rats were only almost the same similarity with yeast as humans because the two lineages differed by around a half dozen substitutions, and had separated from each other around 80 million years ago, but still shared the same lineage for more than half a billion years before that separation, so most of the difference in sequence from yeast was still shared between rats and humans, but their sequences were not identical.
This just means that it isn't the amount of difference you have between taxa, but how that difference is parsed up in any phylogeny.  Chimps and humans shared the same ancestors for the longest time and their sequences are still identical, rats and humans separated around 80 million years ago, but they still share most of their sequence in common because they shared the same lineage for over half a billion years since they had a common ancestor with yeast.
If Luskin took all the DNA and compared it correctly to other apes, primates, and mammals he would find that even though the sequence he has is 14% different between chimps and humans that chimps are still the most closely related Ape, primate, or mammal to humans because we share a common ancestor more recently with chimps than we did with any other ape or mammal.  The sequence we used to get the 1% difference (coding sequence is still only 0.7% different between chimps and humans in spite of the extra genome sequence that has been sequenced) is still the sequence to use to get the most accurate phylogenies because it is the sequence that we can most accurately identify in all the taxa in order to compare them all to each other.  We can't use most of the additional 14% sequence difference because we can't compare those sequences with the other taxa.  They just change too fast in sequence and copy number of repeats.  The other taxa would not have the same sequence to compare, and just comparing the amount of it doesn't tell you much because of the high rate of change in amount of heterochromatin between and within a species.  The DNA that Luskin is lying to the rubes about isn't anything that they can use to detect design, and it can't be used to determine evolutionary relationships.
Ron Okimoto