Jonathan Sarfati of Answers in Genesis tells us in this article that
Human lysozyme is closer to chicken lysozyme than to that of any other mammal.
The creationist True.Origin Archive also repeats this claim in this article.
If true this could show that evolution is false. And it has been a rather common creationist claim. Duane Gish who has a doctorate in biochemistry has said the same thing. It is not true nor is it even close to being true. Human lysozyme is identical to chimpanzee lysozyme thus elementary logic tells us it not possible for another lysozyme to be closer. In reality, chicken lysozyme differs from human lysozyme in 51 out of 130 positions. Ouch!
This is not a case of error since this claim has been around for over 20 years and evolutionists have been correcting it for over 20 years. For lots more information documenting in detail this and related creationist falsehoods see the 1990 article “The Bullfrog Affair.” It also mentions an out-of-context citation which the True.Origin article repeats (of a researcher named Dickerson). I documented a similar lie (this time with sunflowers instead of chickens and using a different protein) by Kent Hovind in “Kent Hovind”s Cytochrome Lie.” Also see “Scientific Creationism and Error” which discusses Gish’s role in this and other falsehoods.
Lets also keep in mind that these sequences are publicly available on the Internet and that creationists claim to have top notch scientists on their side. Plus that this error has been pointed out many times makes it hard for me to call this anything else but a lie.
Added June 30, 2002: Since this was written, Sarfati stopped making the version of this falsehood debunked above. However he has replaced one falsehood with another. His citation on this issue is out-of-context. The Sarfati now says about lysozyme was debunked a long time ago in “The Bullfrog Affair.”