Regarding the Papers referenced above: If the authors maintain that the evidence at the site of fusion is not clear and that explanations as to how this happened are flawed that is possibly concedable. They would need to do more homework than these papers. The discussion of vestigial centromere sequences and telomere motifs being inverted is interesting, though contrary views have been [written up][1] [elsewhere][2]. I'm not going to review that evidence as I think its not primary to the question at hand... I would point out that the centromere and telomere sequences are highly repetitive - they are so repetitive that they are often associated with unreliable sequencing in a typical genome build. While its possible some will be found in future builds of the human genome, such sequences are just as likely to have been excised during mitosis or by mutation. There would be strong selection pressure for them to be excised quickly; having two centromeres on one chromosome would probably be a fatal trait and the same is probably true for telomerase susceptible sequences in the middle of a chromosomal arm is too. A lot has happened at the point of fusion and [150 kB of DNA seems to have included itself which is not from the original Chr 2A or 2B][3]. I think there is some confusion here: The fusion models examined do not predict the fusion from the local configuration of bases. The main evidence for fusion has always been the fact that the two pieces of human chromosome 2 are nearly identical to chromosomes 2A and 2B of apes - typically 96-98% identical. All along their length. The site of fusion ad models for its occurrence is merely confirming what we already - [there are two chromosomes somehow stuck together][4]. The chances are infinitesimal that human chr 2 were to resemble those of other primates at random. This is what you say in science when you mean 'impossible'. One simply doesn't see a segment of DNA the size of Chr 2A and 2B being so similar for such a length when we look at rats, dogs, worms or any more distantly related living thing. But for every primate the relationship corresponds to humans the same way. In addition studies show that these [highly similar blocks of DNA sit right next to the site of fusion][5] and show a crossover where the fusion probably occurred. Some recent hominids - Neanderthals and [Denisovans][8] had the chr 2 fusion as well. I have to say is that there's always a chance that chromosome 2 fusion did not happen though from my point of view [there's a tremendous amount of evidence that it did][6]. The second most likely explanation is that all the other apes had their chromosome 2 break into 2 pieces at some susceptible site. I don't quite agree that chromosome 2 fusion is an indispensable or even leading piece of evidence that means that humans and the other primates are interrelated. That question is a different kettle of fish and the relationship between Human chromosome 2 and the chromosomes of other primates is just one contributing point. All the other chromosome sequences in primates are the same, and nearly every gene in human beings is closer to primates than to other animals. If they had not found chromosome 2 fusion in the genome sequences few if anybody would have worried about it. In fact what we see as we look at all the chromosomes being sequenced, is that most chromosomes have been merged or rearranged over and over again. Over long periods of evolutionary time, a typical chromosome looks like a patchwork quilt stitched up from pieces of other chromosomes. These relationships are called synteny, which reinforce that all living things came from a single line, if you go back far enough. Really, the fusion point of Chr2 is interesting because its a relatively new event; by picking through the pieces we might find some understanding of something that appears to be a common phenomenon in genome dynamics. ![Mouse - human synteny map ][7] **That should't stop the authors from trying again. ** All this being said, as a scientific question I'd rather have a discussion like this, based on evidence and facts that anyone can evaluate. The authors did quite a bit of homework and read some of the literature that is out there. This is the right direction some of the creationists are taking here and I personally hope that they keep at it. If science is to have any merit (or fun) at all, its because any idea can be called into question and be re-evaluated at any time by anyone. [1]: http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html [2]: http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/c.fus.les.html [3]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee_genome_project#Genes_of_the_Chromosome_2_fusion_site [4]: http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm [5]: http://genome.cshlp.org/content/12/11/1651.full [6]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA [7]: https://i.sstatic.net/luyeE.jpg [8]: http://biologos.org/blog/denisovans-humans-and-the-chromosome-2-fusion