If you go back and read the post, you will notice I was speculating. It makes no difference if we are talking [bleep] dogs or a common ancestor. Do the math; and use only 2% differnce. There ain't no way Poncho.
The original study you are siting as I also sited for the 98% was when the scientists excpected to find close matches. Therefore they looked in the places they thought they would find matches: viola 98%. Then as they continued to map the DNA, they discovered lots of irregularities. This revised the number to 97%.
Assuming your numbers correct, how close are we to dogs? Iguanas? Lung Fish? Lobsters? Slugs? Bacteria? I imagine the number declines accordingly, depending on how distant our common ancestor with each of these species.
