More Evidence for the Absurdity of the Macroevolutionary Hypothesis of Human Origins

Science Daily website is pro-evolution, but they keep putting out articles that, once you parse through the bias, clearly shows cracks in the macroevolutionary hypothesis.   For example, the findings in this article about a "new" gene in humans that explains in part why our brains are so superior.

Listen to the language they use...

It is known that most differences between species occur as a result of changes to existing genes, or the duplication and deletion of genes.  But scientists say this gene emerged fully functional out of non-coding genetic material, previously termed "junk DNA," in a startlingly brief interval of evolutionary time. Until now, it has been remarkably difficult to see this process in action.

Researcher Dr Martin Taylor, who led the study at the Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine at the University of Edinburgh, said the results were significant.  He said: "As a species, humans are wonderfully inventive -- we are socially and technologically evolving all the time. But this research shows that we are innovating at a genetic level too. This new molecule sprang from nowhere at a time when our species was undergoing dramatic changes: living longer, walking upright, learning how to use tools and how to communicate.

The language that they use, the language that they must use to accurately describe the evidence they have found, is just like that which would be used to describe a fiat miracle, an act of creation, rather than the language of Darwinian mechanics.   They say that this gene sprang up between one and six million years ago but that it is unique to humans.   How odd that it does not appear to have either been present or if present helped to survive to the modern day all the various hominids they say we evolved from.    Nor has such a gene "sprung from nowhere" to grant any ape or monkey species the same advantages we supposedly obtained from this new gene that sprang from nowhere.