chimpanzee-human DNA
 

now I probably have the numbers wrong (and quite likely the math) but I'm trying my best. chimpanzee DNA is about 99% the same as ours and 96% of our DNA doesn't do anything whatsoever so doesn't that mean that for practical DNA the differance would be only around .04%? someone please correct my information.

Okay, when scientists say that 96% of the DNA 'doesn't do anything', what they mean is "We only know what 4% of it does"...

The 99% figure is correct, though. Don't know where you got the whole 'practical difference' thing, though...

no it's not that they don't know what it does it physicly does nothing. I am not making this up and I think I know what I'm talking about. what I meant is if 96% of 1% is useles the wouldn't it be .04%? I might have the number of useles DNA parts but I'm sure that many of them are useless.

Well, no, because the bits that tell us apart from chimpanzees obviously do something, otherwise they wouldn't tell us apart... the 96% are all in the bits we share witht the chimps...

ok your right but what I was trying to point out was that we are VERY close to chimpanzee's (.04 differance in DNA is alot especially in useful DNA though seeing as one chemical in the wrong place can make someone an Einstine or braindead). also our DNA is about 50% the same as that of a banana.

No; we have the same number of chromasomes as bananas.

In so far as I understand it, those portions of the genome that "doesn't do anything" actually just doesn't specifically code for proteins/RNA ("non-coding regions", oh-how-originally-named. Biochemists like stating the bloody obvious, I think). It has a regulatory function, and helps enhance protein expression. Some might be markers that point out the start of a gene, some might be "promoters" that aid in its expression, and you have a whole variety of "upstream elements" that also aid in genetic expression... thus quite a comparatively large portion of those parts that don't appear to "do" anything actually have quite an important function in genetic expression.

(If anyone's hugely interested, I found this site to be rather useful... ;) Yes, I understand most of it as well... *goes off to read "Mammalian Myotube Dedifferentiation Induced by Newt Regeneration Extract"*)