18 Million Years Ago Means...500,000?

Thanks for the answer @glipsnort. This not about the detailed wording of the new version. That’s a minor point.

Of course some conclusions are the same too. Both versions conclude there is evidence for common descent. But the focus of the article (and the 2011 CT article it was addressing) was on ancestral population sizes.

On that matter, population sizes, they claim that the conclusions are “unchanged.” Do you agree with this or not?

This is the original conclusion…

Is it the same as this conclusion?:

If they are different, do you think it is correct to say the conclusions are “unchanged”? It seems you think one conclusion was unchanged, and the other was changed?