There is no evolution or creationism - this is the new Matrix/DNA world view

The gap between humans and chimps is just a few percent (98% by substitutions, 96% counting indels). That is less of a gap than there is between chimps and gorillas. That's right. The gap between chimps and humans is less than the gap between chimps and any other ape.

As to extraterrestrial astronauts, why would they have DNA that is 98% chimp DNA if they evolved somewhere else?

You forgot a third option: neutral.

In order for this claim to be relevant, you need to show that evolution would need to produce new information (as you define it) in order to produce the biodiversity we see today.

That is a lot of empty assertions. What you are ignoring is that the DNA in sperm and eggs carries mutations, so offspring are going to be different than their parents. Also, mutation is random as are the specific egg and sperm that unite to form that offspring. There is no guarantee at any point that a specific human will be produced. The same two parents will produce a different human being every time, with its own specific genome that is different from parents and siblings.

As you move forward in time and humans change, at what point do you no longer call them humans? At one time there were only wolves. Now there are wolves and thousands of dog breeds. At what point did a wolf stop being a wolf and become a Chihuahua?

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Sperm and egg cells do not have all the information needed to build a human body. When they combine to create a new genome, they create a genome that has never existed before. If you want to call it a wolf, Chihuahua, human, or whatever, that is up to you. What is important is that this organism with this genome has never existed before.

Over time, mutations in each generation will keep accumulating. When you compare individuals that lived millions of years apart there may very well be differences between them. At one point does one become the other? That is entirely arbitrary.

When does someone go from young to old? When does a young man go from being short to being tall? Skinny to fat, and maybe back to skinny? These are spectrums, just as evolutionary change is.

That is exactly what we should see with evolution when those time points are separated by millions of years.

If all we had of you was two pictures, one from when you were 5 and another when you were 50, could we say that you suddenly became old instead of gradually aging?

The accumulation of mutations over time causes species to be different through time.

You have one of two choices.

1. You can say that mutations can't produce new information. If that is your argument, then you have argued yourself out of the debate. If differences in DNA sequence that give rise to changes in morphology are not changes in information, then evolution doesn't need to produce new information in order to produce the biodiversity we see today.

2. You just admit that the most honest approach is to admit that mutations can produce new information.

The problem is that anti-evolutionists focus so hard on making it impossible for mutations to produce new information that they lose sight of what they were really trying to explain, how morphology can change over time.

Based on what criteria?

Are chimps and humans different because our diets and living conditions are different? If we started living in the water like whales do, would we start giving birth to whales?

Or are the differences between species due to DNA base differences in their genomes?

At what precise nanometer does someone go from being short to being tall, and how do you justify that precise height?

I am talking about a population of organisms over much longer time periods. Your example is not homologous or analogous.

Also, the theory of evolution also says that they will still be pigs, but perhaps pigs that are different from their ancestors, or perhaps a new species of pig.