Malevolent Design - How Ancient Viral DNA Gave Humans An Advantage But Can Be Co-Opted By Lung Cancer - Malevolent Design, Incompetence or Evolution?

AI depiction of the ancient retroviral DNA that is essential for embryo development but can help lung cancer cells survive too

ChatGPT-6 Astra

Post-gastrulation amnioids - models with mimic the development of the amniotic sac forming as expected (top panel). Amnioids without a key calcium-buffering gene and its accompanying switch don't form as expected (bottom two panels).

Credit: Borzo Gharibi, Science Advances (2026).

An ancient advantage, hijacked by cancer | Crick

Some 13 million years before anyone could have written a creation myth, a retrovirus inserted its genetic material into the genome of an ancestral ape. Today, part of that viral legacy helps regulate early human development. This presents creationists with several difficulties at once: a history vastly older than their biblical chronology permits, genetic material acquired from a virus, and an evolutionary innovation produced by putting an existing sequence to a new use. There is also an uncomfortable sting in the tail for advocates of a benevolent intelligent designer: cancer cells can exploit the same biological machinery.

The research, reported in Science Advances, concerns a remnant of an ancient retrovirus known as HERVH. This sequence acts as a switch controlling a form of calbindin, a protein involved in buffering calcium inside cells. Removing the switch or calbindin disrupted the growth and developmental behaviour of human embryonic stem cells and the organisation of models of early embryonic structures.

The evolutionary distinction matters. The original acquisition of viral DNA represents horizontal genetic transfer: genetic material crossed from a virus into its host, rather than arriving through ordinary inheritance from a parent. Once incorporated into the germ line, however, that material could pass vertically through successive generations. Its recruitment to regulate a host gene is an example of exaptation — the co-option of an existing feature for a different function. The virus did not need to invent calbindin, nor did evolution need to create an entirely new protein from scratch. A new regulatory relationship could arise by combining material with different evolutionary histories.

This is precisely the sort of process obscured by the creationist slogan that new genetic “information” requires an intelligent author. Biologically useful novelty can involve changes in when, where and how an existing gene is expressed. Imported DNA can supply a regulatory element; subsequent evolution can preserve and modify its contribution. Calling the result “information” does not erase the natural processes that produced it, still less establish that someone intended the outcome.

The chronology is equally inconvenient. Comparative primate evidence places this insertion roughly 13 million years ago, after the lineage leading to humans and the African great apes had separated from the orangutan lineage. Orangutans are themselves great apes; the relevant event occurred within the broader great-ape family tree. Either way, this is inherited molecular history extending far beyond the few thousand years allowed by a literal young-Earth reading of Genesis.

Yet a mechanism useful during development need not remain beneficial in every context. Earlier research showed that lung squamous cell carcinoma can activate this viral switch, helping cancer cells avoid senescence — a state in which cells stop dividing. The cancer biology is complex, but the central evolutionary point is clear: machinery that supports normal development can also become available for malignant cells to exploit.

That is consistent with an evolutionary cost-benefit trade-off. Natural selection can preserve a developmental advantage despite a vulnerability elsewhere in life; it has no foresight with which to guarantee lifelong protection from every possible consequence. But if intelligent-design advocates insist that useful genetic arrangements demonstrate deliberate engineering, they must apply that reasoning consistently. A designer credited with the developmental benefit cannot simply be excused responsibility for the exploitable weakness. On their own premises, the result raises questions about competence, benevolence, or even malevolent design. Evolution requires no such theological contortions: an ancient infection, inherited variation and the opportunistic reuse of existing material are sufficient ingredients for the story.

Refuting Creationism - More Problems for Creationists As Science Reveals Yet More Evidence Falsifying The Bible Creation Myth

Ediacaran sea floor, Namibia, 543 Millian Years Ago

Oxford University Museum of Natural History

Ediacaran sea floor, Namibia, Southwest Africa, 543 million years ago.

Credit: Museum of Natural History, University of Oxford / Mighty Fossils.

New study suggests animals may have evolved vastly earlier than fossil evidence suggests | Oxford University

One of the strengths of science is that its conclusions remain open to revision. An assumption that once appeared reasonable can be tested against new evidence, found wanting, and replaced with something better. For creationists, who frequently portray such revisions as evidence that science cannot be trusted, this must seem a peculiar way of acquiring knowledge. Yet it is precisely how science improves its understanding: by allowing the evidence to correct the explanation, rather than requiring the evidence to conform to a predetermined answer.

A new study published in Science Advances provides another example. Researchers have challenged an assumption used in some recent estimates of when animals originated. Their analyses support an origin approximately 700–800 million years ago, potentially extending animal evolutionary history by around 200 million years beyond estimates based on a younger maximum-age constraint.

The issue is a deceptively simple one: if a fossil deposit preserves microscopic organisms in exquisite detail, but contains no definite animals, does that mean animals had not yet evolved? Some researchers have used the approximately 590-million-year-old Weng’an Biota of China in this way, reasoning that animals would have been preserved there had they existed. Its lack of unequivocal animal fossils has therefore helped set a proposed upper age limit for animal origins.

The new research exposes a difficulty with that reasoning. The younger Kheseen Biota of Mongolia also preserves exceptionally detailed microfossils, yet none can confidently be identified as animals. In this case, however, animals are known from other deposits of comparable age. Their absence from Kheseen therefore cannot demonstrate their absence from the world. Particular environments and conditions of fossilisation can leave animals out of the record, even when other organisms are beautifully preserved.

This matters because molecular clocks — methods that use genetic differences between living organisms to estimate when their ancestors diverged — require calibration against geological and fossil evidence. Change an unjustified age constraint, and the resulting estimates can change substantially. Using alternative constraints from older deposits, the researchers recovered a much earlier possible origin for animals. They have not discovered an 800-million-year-old animal, nor established a final date for the animal kingdom’s beginnings. They have shown why one argument for restricting those beginnings to a much later interval is unreliable.

For young-Earth creationism, neither chronology offers any comfort. The debate concerns events hundreds of millions of years ago, not whether animal history can be squeezed into the few thousand years allowed by a literal reading of Genesis. Uncertainty over precisely when animals originated does not make every proposed date equally credible, any more than uncertainty over a mountain’s exact height makes it plausibly a molehill.

Creationism Refuted - A Four-Winged, Flying Dinosaur - From More Than 100 Million Years Before 'Creation Week'

An artist’s rendering of the Norellraptor after an “exquisitely preserved” fossil with a complete skeleton and parts of its plumage was unearthed in Liaoning province.

Image: Zhao Chuang/South China Morning Post

Norellraptor barsboldi 130108-MHGU-F4281, appendicular elements.

a Right hand. b Pubis. c Feet. am, acetabular margin; ap, apron; cs, claw soft tissue; gi, gastral impression; mcI-III, metacarpals I to III; mtI-V, metatarsals I to V; p, phalanx; pf, pubic foot; r, radius; sc, semilunate carpal; t, tibiotarsus; u, ulna; uI-III, unguals 1 to 3. Scale bar = 10 mm.

Revolutionary Feathered Dinosaur Discovery in China Suggests Flight Evolved Multiple Times : ScienceAlert

For creationists who insist that complex adaptations could only have appeared as complete, purpose-built packages, another feathered dinosaur has provided an awkward piece of evidence. Evolution does not require a finished flight apparatus to materialise in a single miraculous leap. It can modify inherited structures, combine them in new ways, and produce similar adaptations along different branches of the family tree. A newly described dinosaur from China adds evidence that even among the close relatives of birds, there was more than one evolutionary route towards an aerial lifestyle.

In a paper published in Nature Communications, Xuri Wang and colleagues describe Norellraptor barsboldi, a small microraptorine dinosaur from the Lower Cretaceous Jiufotang Formation of Liaoning, north-eastern China. Its remarkably complete, 57-centimetre skeleton preserves traces of plumage, including on its forelimbs and hindlimbs. It belonged to the group of feathered dinosaurs famous for their four-winged forms: evolutionary relatives of birds, rather than evidence that modern birds appeared fully formed and unrelated to other dinosaurs.

The crucial finding concerns the sequence in which adaptations arose. The researchers’ evolutionary analysis indicates that approximately 30 per cent of the derived anatomical features identified in microraptorine evolution also evolved independently in the bird lineage. However, they appeared in different orders. This supports the gradual assembly of flight-associated anatomy under different selective pressures, rather than the inheritance of an already completed flight apparatus from a common ancestor.

Refuting Creationism - A 'Jumping Gene' Jumps All Over Creationist Dogmas

AI-generated conceptual illustration of BC200’s transfer from human DNA into a poxvirus, with background neurons representing its association with neuronal regulation.

ChatGPT-6 Astra

AI-generated conceptual illustration of BC200’s transfer from human DNA into a poxvirus, with background neurons representing its association with neuronal regulation.

ChatGPT-6 Astra

New type of human jumping gene found in a poxvirus | Cornell Chronicle

Creationists who insist that functional genetic information requires an intelligent designer have another evolutionary history to explain. A genetic element associated with neuronal regulation in primates began as a “jumping gene”, acquired a cellular function, and nevertheless retained its ability to generate copies elsewhere in the genome. Copies even escaped into a human virus. Far from resembling a collection of sealed, immutable designs, genomes reveal a history of copying, repurposing and exchange.

The element is BC200, the subject of a paper in Science by Pu Gao and colleagues, published on 24 September 2026. Its ancestor was a transposable element recruited into a cellular role approximately 40 million years ago. BC200 produces a non-coding RNA: its product is an RNA molecule, rather than a protein. Abundant in neurons, it is thought to help regulate protein production, although its precise physiological role remains incompletely understood.

This is an example of evolutionary exaptation: existing biological material acquires a new use. A sequence whose ancestral significance lay in its capacity to propagate could become useful to its host. No foresight is required. Variants arise without anticipating future needs, and natural selection can preserve those that improve reproductive success. The new function need not have been the reason the original sequence existed.

The unusual feature here is that recruitment did not end BC200’s mobility. Genes derived from transposable elements typically lose that ancestral capacity; BC200 retained it. The researchers identified two independent transfers into molluscum contagiosum virus during the history of modern humans. Whether the acquired sequence benefits the virus remains an open question.

There are two distinct difficulties here for creationism. For young-Earth creationists, the roughly 40-million-year history already places these events far outside their biblical chronology. For intelligent-design advocates, the difficulty is mechanistic: biological function can emerge through the modification and recruitment of material that already exists. Calling the resulting function “designed” adds no explanation of the evidence.

Nor does transfer into a virus mean that a human became a virus, or that every transferred sequence must be adaptive. It demonstrates something more precise: genetic material can cross the boundary between a host genome and a viral genome. BC200’s history combines inherited ancestry, evolutionary repurposing and continuing mobility — exactly the sort of untidy, contingent history that evolutionary biology allows researchers to investigate.

Creationism Refuted - How an 'Irreducibly Complex' Process Evolved Naturally

AI-generated illustration of competing bacteriophage viruses and the CRISPR-Cas RNA immune system

ChatGPT-6 Astra

Kenneth Loi shows how VIPR RNA (in pink) snakes around the double helix of DNA (yellow and green) to form a unique triplex structure.

Photo: Glenn Ramit.

VIPR Systems Break the Rules of the Genetic Code to Target and Twist Around DNA

One of the recurring mistakes in creationist arguments is to assume that a complex biological system must always have performed its present function. If its components now work together, the argument goes, they must have been created together for that purpose. Evolution, however, can recruit existing machinery for new roles. Two papers in *Science* now provide evidence that this process may help explain the origin of an important form of microbial immunity—with the intriguing possibility that bacteria acquired the precursors of their antiviral weapons from viruses themselves.

To appreciate the discovery, it helps to understand what CRISPR immunity actually is. Although CRISPR is familiar as a tool for editing genes, its natural role is defence. Many bacteria and archaea possess CRISPR–Cas systems that retain molecular records of past invaders. Short pieces of foreign DNA are incorporated into the cell’s genome, between repeated sequences. These stored fragments provide templates for small RNA molecules, which guide CRISPR-associated—or Cas—proteins to matching genetic material during subsequent infections. Depending on the system, the resulting response can destroy invading DNA or RNA. This is adaptive immunity: protection directed against particular threats, with a genetic memory that can pass to descendants.

CRISPR stands for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats”, a description of the DNA arrangement in which those memories are stored. The best-known gene-editing protein, Cas9, belongs to class 2, whose targeting machinery centres on one large protein. Class-1 systems instead use assemblies of several proteins to recognise their targets. It is the evolutionary origin of this latter machinery that the new research addresses.

The studies, published on 17 September 2026 investigate a compact system called VIPR, short for viral interference programmable repeat. Found in viruses and bacteria, it combines a small protein with a guide RNA. The researchers propose that an ancestral VIPR-like system involved in competition between viruses was recruited into bacterial defence, eventually contributing to the evolution of class-1 CRISPR. This would be evolutionary co-option: machinery favoured in one context becoming useful in another.

Malevolent Design - A Newly-Identified Tick-Borne Virus That Teams Up With Another Virus And Kills People - Malevolent Intelligence Or Evolution?

Engorged female Tick, Haemaphysalis longicornis. (ventral view)

Timothy Takemoto / Flickr cc

Engorged Tick"

Timothy Takemoto / Flickr cc

Scientists in China discover new tick-borne virus that causes flu-like illness | CIDRAP

One of the problems with claiming that biological complexity proves intelligent design is that the argument cannot stop conveniently at butterflies, flowers and the human eye. If complex biological machinery requires a designer, then the same reasoning must apply to parasites and pathogens. A virus’s ability to infect us cannot become an unfortunate accident merely because crediting the supposed designer would now be embarrassing. Nor can the animal that carries it from host to host be excluded from the reckoning.

A newly identified tick-borne virus in China provides another uncomfortable example. Described in a correspondence in The New England Journal of Medicine, Asian longhorned tick nairovirus, or ALTNV, is associated with fever, fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms and, in some patients, reduced platelet counts. Its vector is the already familiar Asian longhorned tick, Haemaphysalis longicornis; experiments demonstrated transmission to mice. “New” here means newly recognised by science, not shown to have come into existence recently.

The clinical findings deserve care. All 56 patients reported with ALTNV alone recovered without lasting effects. However, seven of 38 patients infected with both ALTNV and Dabie bandavirus died. These deaths do not establish that ALTNV alone is lethal, or determine its contribution to the fatalities. They do place the discovery within a system of tick-borne infections capable of causing serious illness and death.

Now apply the creationist rule that functional complexity and genetic information require an intelligent author. On that premise, the designer must take responsibility for the infectious agent and its means of delivery. Here is a blood-feeding animal whose activities provide a route for viruses to enter other animals, including humans. If every relevant adaptation was knowingly intended by an all-knowing creator, then the resulting suffering cannot be dismissed as an unforeseen side-effect. The alleged designer knew what its creations would do.

That is the force of the malevolent-designer argument. It does not require us to believe that a supernatural intelligence actually makes viruses. It asks why features that serve pathogens should count as evidence of loving craftsmanship when equivalent features serving their victims are routinely presented as precisely that. If the designer receives credit for our defences, it must also answer for the threats those defences sometimes fail to overcome. Deliberately creating the means of making people ill is hardly an obvious expression of benevolence.

Creationism Refuted - 'Jumping Genes' Create New Functional Genetic Information - No Magic needed.

Eciton vagans, with lava from a raided wasp nest.

By Geoff Gallice from Gainesville, FL, USA Spoils of the raid, CC BY 2.0, Link

Ants look back on an evolutionary story of success. The photo shows workers of the Asian weaver ant.

© Lukas Schrader

“Jumping genes” helped ants in their evolutionary triumph after the extinction of the dinosaurs

One of creationism’s favourite assertions is that evolution cannot produce “new genetic information” without an intelligent designer. What usually goes missing is a clear definition of information, an explanation of why known genetic mechanisms cannot generate novelty, or any evidence of the supposed designer doing anything. Meanwhile, evolutionary biologists continue to investigate the natural processes by which genomes change and organisms acquire new capabilities. A new study of ants provides another example of how productive that scientific approach can be.

As reported in Science Advances, an international team led by Dr Lukas Schrader has investigated the contribution of transposable elements, commonly called “jumping genes”, to ant evolution. These mobile DNA sequences can move or copy themselves within genomes. Their activity can be disruptive, but it can also supply material for evolutionary innovation. The research links their activity to the expansion of gene families, including those encoding the odour receptors so important to ants’ chemical communication.

The researchers compared genomes from 163 ant species, representing twelve of the sixteen living subfamilies. They identified independent bursts of transposable-element activity in the ancestors of major ant groups, preceding their rapid diversification following the Cretaceous–Palaeogene, or K–Pg, mass extinction approximately 66 million years ago. The findings support a connection between changes within genomes and the evolutionary opportunities created by a profoundly altered world.

The evolutionary significance is straightforward. A mass extinction changes the conditions under which survivors live: ecological relationships are disrupted, resources become available in different ways, and opportunities arise as ecosystems recover. A genetic variant that previously offered little advantage may become useful under these new conditions. Natural selection can then favour organisms carrying it. Neither the mutation nor the environmental upheaval needs to anticipate the outcome.

Nor does genetic novelty require a complete, finished gene to appear from nowhere. Duplication supplies additional copies of existing sequences, which can subsequently diverge; changes to the regulation and arrangement of DNA can also alter what an organism does. Calling the starting material “existing information” does nothing to prevent its descendants from acquiring new functions. The relevant questions concern what changed, how it changed, and what consequences followed—not whether creationists are willing to call the result “information”.

Here, the specific finding is an association between mobile DNA, expanding gene families and subsequent diversification. It should not be inflated into a claim that every extra receptor acquired a demonstrated new function, or that the asteroid impact directly produced particular beneficial mutations. Nevertheless, the study supplies evidence for a natural route connecting genomic change with evolutionary diversification, precisely where the creationist argument substitutes an assertion of impossibility.

For young-Earth creationists, there is the additional inconvenience of the timescale. This diversification followed an extinction event some 66 million years ago—thousands of times further into the past than their entire supposed history of the Universe allows. Ant evolution was already unfolding in a world unimaginably ancient by biblical standards. What emerges is a history of genetic change, environmental catastrophe and opportunities exploited by surviving lineages, without foresight or a predetermined destination.

Refuting Creationism - A Star Is Born - And Rewrites The Story Of The Origin Of Starfish

AI-generate impression of Yujingia glutenotunica.
(Colours and aspects of its living appearance are speculative)

ChatGPT-6 Astra

Artist's impression of Yujingia glutenotunica

Credit: Kaiyue He, et al

A star is born: half billion-year-old fossil rewrites the origin story of starfish | University of Cambridge

One of creationism’s favourite misrepresentations of the fossil record, promulgated By Stephen S. Mayer of the Discovery Institute, is that the Cambrian ‘explosion’ was a sudden creation event, when the major animal groups appeared without evolutionary ancestors, already equipped with their modern body plans. This depends on treating ‘rapid’ in the geological sense as ‘instantaneous’, and overlooking the transitional fossils that reveal how those body plans evolved. A newly described animal from China provides another awkward example for that narrative. And of course the existence of transition fossils themselves are a major problem for creationists who insist that they don't exist because their creation myth can't accommodate them.

Named Yujingia glutenotunica, this small, soft-bodied creature lived approximately 518 million years ago. As described by Kaiyue He and colleagues in their paper in Current Biology, its combination of anatomical features places it close to the common ancestor of two groups that now look remarkably different: the echinoderms, including starfish and sea urchins, and the hemichordates, including acorn worms. Together, these constitute the animal group known as Ambulacraria.

The fossils preserve a digestive tract and feather-like feeding tentacles, together with another set of appendages that may have anchored the animal to the seabed. Crucially, Yujingia possessed an elaborate feeding apparatus without a mineralised skeleton. Its anatomy therefore supports the evolutionary interpretation that specialised feeding structures preceded some of the defining features of later echinoderms.
This is what makes transitional fossils so informative. They need not resemble an animal caught halfway through changing into a modern species, nor must they be demonstrably the direct ancestors of anything alive today. They preserve combinations of characteristics that help scientists reconstruct the order in which evolutionary changes occurred. A fully functioning animal can be transitional in its anatomy: ‘transitional’ describes its relationship to other forms, not an inability to survive until evolution has finished building it.

Unintelligent Design - How The Immune System Can Go Rogue And Cause Premature Ageing

AI-generated image

ChatGPT-6 Astra

Reversing hallmarks of rapid aging by silencing a cellular alarm system

Photo credit: Eitan Moses

How the Immune System Rewrites Rapid Aging

One of the difficulties creationists have with presenting the immune system as evidence of intelligent design is explaining why something supposedly designed to protect us so often contributes to our illnesses. A defence system that can turn the body's own damaged DNA into a trigger for further damage is hardly an obvious example of competent, benevolent engineering. It is, however, entirely understandable as a product of evolution: a collection of mechanisms favoured for their benefits, constrained by their history, and carrying costs that natural selection has never eliminated.

Research from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem provides a revealing example. In a paper published in Genes & Development, Marva Bergman and colleagues investigated how a DNA-sensing protein called cGAS contributes to disorders involving defective DNA repair; the body's response to genetic damage can itself become an important source of harm.

The underlying problem is straightforward. DNA appearing in the fluid surrounding a cell's nucleus can be a warning of infection. cGAS helps detect it and activates an inflammatory defence response. But the DNA need not belong to a virus: damaged cells can expose their own DNA to the same sensor. Consequently, an alarm that normally helps protect against infection can sustain inflammation even when there is no invading organism to fight. The response then risks damaging the very tissues it ordinarily helps defend.

The researchers modelled two human DNA-repair disorders, ataxia-telangiectasia and Bloom syndrome, in turquoise killifish, Nothobranchius furzeri. In the ataxia-telangiectasia model, disrupting the gene for cGAS partially alleviated reproductive defects, cellular senescence in the liver, and inflammation in the cerebellum. Several measures of genome instability also improved, consistent with cGAS having additional effects inside the nucleus, beyond its familiar inflammatory role.

There was, however, a crucial complication: losing cGAS in fish without the underlying repair defect made pathology and genome instability worse. This was therefore no demonstration that the immune system contains a universally dispensable component, nor a discovery that switching off one gene reverses normal ageing. The same protein could be beneficial or harmful depending on the biological circumstances.

That is precisely where the evolutionary explanation becomes useful. A sensor that responds to DNA in an unusual location offers a broadly effective means of detecting danger, but that signal does not identify the DNA's origin with certainty. Such a system needs safeguards and regulation, and its usefulness does not guarantee that those safeguards will work under every condition. Natural selection can preserve a mechanism whose overall benefits outweigh its costs; it cannot anticipate every future mutation or guarantee freedom from disease.

The study did not test the evolutionary history of cGAS, but its findings illustrate the kind of context-dependent compromise evolution produces. For intelligent-design advocates, the awkward question is why an allegedly perfect designer would make protection and self-inflicted damage so intimately connected. For evolutionary biology, the useful question is how that connection works—and whether understanding it can help us reduce the harm.

This is just one example of how the human body is not a work of perfect design, but the product of sub-optimal compromises constrained by contingent history and lacking in foresight, where additional layers of complexity are not hallmarks of intelligent design that creationists like to imagine, but of the need for controls and compensations for problems created by earlier iterations of the evolutionary cycle. Many more are explained in my book, The Body Of Evidence: How The Human Body Refutes Intelligent Design

Refuting Creationism - Bigamous Beetles Have Better Babies - Observed Evolution Over 15 Years

Red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum.

By Udo Schmidt from Deutschland Tribolium castaneum (Herbst, 1797) CC BY-SA 2.0, Link

Red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum

Source: Wikipedia - Public Domain, Link

How sex can help save species from extinction | UEA

One of the recurring claims of creationist apologetics is that mutations condemn living populations to relentless genetic deterioration — a supposedly inevitable decline which evolution cannot overcome. What this argument neglects is that mutations do not operate in isolation: selection influences which genetic variants pass to subsequent generations. Now, a long-running experiment with red flour beetles has provided direct genomic evidence that competition for mates can help remove harmful variants, leaving populations more resistant to extinction.

The research, led by Michael D. Pointer, of the University of East Anglia Department of Biological Sciences, described in a report in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA (PNAS), also addresses an interesting evolutionary question: why is sexual reproduction so widespread despite its considerable costs? Finding mates takes time and energy, competition can be costly, and reproduction requires contributions from individuals which do not themselves produce eggs. One possible compensating benefit is that competition for reproductive success helps prevent damaging mutations from accumulating.

The researchers tested this idea using populations of the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum, maintained under stronger or weaker sexual selection. After 156 generations, whole-genome sequencing showed that populations exposed to stronger sexual selection carried fewer genetic variants predicted to be harmful. Their overall genetic diversity, however, remained comparable. Selection had reduced the burden of damaging variants without a corresponding reduction in variation across the genome.

The distinction matters. Genetic diversity is often used as an indicator of a population’s prospects, but the amount of variation cannot tell us everything about its effects. In this experiment, the estimated burden of harmful variants was a better predictor of extinction under inbreeding than diversity alone. Populations could retain similar amounts of genetic variation while differing in their vulnerability to genetic stress.

Creationism Refuted - Dino Dung Tells Us More Than The Bible's Ignorant Authors Ever Could

Artist's impression of a tyrannosaur preying on an ancient diving bird.

Credit: Andrey Atuchin

The fossil feather preserved in dinosaur poop.

Credit: O’Connor, et al. (2026))

A fossil feather preserved inside dinosaur poop could help explain why birds survived the mass extinction - Field Museum

Creationism’s problems with the fossil record now extend even to dinosaur droppings. A small piece of fossilised dung from Montana preserves evidence of a meal eaten some 66 million years ago — long before the supposed ‘Creation Week’ of young-Earth creationism. Within it are feathers that may help illuminate why some ancient birds disappeared while the ancestors of today’s birds survived. As, reported in Current Biology, researchers led by Field Museum palaeontologist Jingmai O’Connor, examining a coprolite — fossilised faeces — from the Hell Creek Formation found exceptionally preserved feathers alongside fish scales and bones belonging to a hesperornithiform, an extinct diving bird.

The feathers combine structures associated with waterproofing in modern aquatic birds with smaller, simpler, fuzzy body feathers. The researchers suggest that differences in insulation, feather replacement through moulting, or both might have influenced which bird lineages survived the cold conditions following the end-Cretaceous asteroid impact. Hesperornithiforms disappeared; the lineage containing all living birds survived. This remains a hypothesis, however: one coprolite cannot establish why entire groups became extinct. The distinction between the observed feathers and the proposed explanation is central to the Field Museum’s account of the findings.

For creationists, the difficulty goes beyond the date. This combination of ancestral and more derived features makes sense within an evolutionary family tree, in which different characteristics change at different rates. Evolution does not require every part of an animal to move together along some imaginary ladder from ‘primitive’ to ‘advanced’. Nor does an extinct bird need to be a direct ancestor of living species to preserve evidence of the evolutionary history they share. There is also a useful lesson here about adaptation. A feature that works adequately in one environment may become a liability when conditions change. Evolution has no foresight: natural selection cannot prepare organisms for an asteroid impact millions of years in the future. Survival depends on the circumstances organisms encounter and the characteristics they already possess, with chance also playing its part. What makes this discovery particularly telling is how an apparently unpromising object can yield evidence against which explanations can be tested. Scientists can investigate both the history of feathers and the unresolved details of extinction without invoking a designer. The uncertainty concerns which natural factors mattered most — and further fossils may help resolve it. Even a dinosaur’s discarded meal can contribute to that process.

Malevolent Design - Creationists Plagued By Ancient Parasites

AI-generated image of an Ancient Baikal settlement hit by plague

ChatGPT-6 Astra

WARNING!

If prompted, DO NOT 'click here to continue'.
A rogue advertiser (AwayTravel) is linking to a potentially dangerous site!

Two of the occupants of this grave were full siblings: a brother (aged 7-9 years old) and a sister (aged 9-11 years old) from whom plague DNA was identified. Not enough of the remains of the third individual were preserved to be able to be able to analyse them as well.

Photo: Vladimiri Bazaliiskii.

Oldest strains of plague caused deadly outbreaks 5,500 years ago – University of Copenhagen

For creationists who insist that biological complexity requires an intelligent designer, plague presents an awkward question: what, exactly, was the designer trying to achieve? A parasitic bacterium capable of causing fatal disease in children is certainly biologically impressive. Whether it is evidence of benevolent intelligence is another matter entirely, but it appears to conform to creationists 'proof' of intelligent design - irreducible complexity and complex specified genetic information, both of which ID proponents insist can only be created by an intelligent designer.

Research published in Nature reveals that early strains of Yersinia pestis, the plague bacterium, were already causing deadly outbreaks among hunter-gatherers around Lake Baikal in Siberia approximately 5,500 years ago. These were small, mobile communities: crowded agricultural settlements were evidently not a prerequisite for devastating plague outbreaks.

Researchers detected plague DNA in 18 of 46 individuals examined from four cemeteries. Combined with radiocarbon dating, burial evidence and reconstructed family relationships, the findings point to outbreaks that killed members of the same families, with a particularly striking impact on children. That detection rate is a proportion of the sampled dead, of course, not a measurement of the mortality rate in the living population.

The evolutionary details are especially revealing. These early strains lacked some of the adaptations associated with efficient flea-borne transmission in later plague. Nevertheless, they could cause lethal disease. They also possessed a gene locus encoding a superantigen — a substance capable of provoking excessive immune activation — which is absent from later plague strains. Its contribution to their lethality remains a hypothesis, but the changing genetic repertoire exposes a pathogen with an evolutionary history, rather than an organism equipped from the outset with one fixed set of features.

For intelligent design advocates, this creates a familiar difficulty. If useful biological machinery demonstrates a designer’s foresight, why should machinery that helps pathogens exploit their hosts be exempt from the same argument? Invoking a “Fall” supplies a theological explanation, but it does not establish a biological mechanism or account for the particular genetic changes revealed by ancient DNA.

Refuting Creationism - Norwegian Fossil Shows Complex Organisms - 560 Million Years Before 'Creation Week'

Charnia, one of the oldest 3D Ediacaran fossils found

Stratigraphic context of the Kommagnes Charnia specimen. A, photograph (facing north) of the eastern part of the cliff, with the site of the float block marked by a star. B, stratigraphic log of the left side of A, marking the stratigraphic range from which the float block could have originated.

From: Veenma, Y.P., et al. (2026)

One of the oldest known 3D animal fossils found in Norwegian sheep field | University of Cambridge

Creationists have a major problem with the so-called Cambrian Explosion, some 535 million years ago. On the one hand, they insist it was a sudden moment of creation in which multiple different body-plans were magically created without ancestry; on the other hand, they deny there was any history before 6,000-10,000 years ago. Clearly both views can't be right; However, both views can be wrong.

And for creationists of both camps, the Ediacaran presents and even bigger problem: not only did it precede the Cambrian, but it shows that complex body-plans had already evolved. This problem just got a lot more acute with the discovery of an exceptionally well-preserved fossil in a sheep field in Arctic Norway, in approximately 560 million year old rocks, of a fossils of Charnia, a branching, frond-like organism that lived during the Ediacaran Period, well before the Cambrian began. These organisms inhabited an ancient seabed hundreds of millions of years before the supposed ‘Creation Week’ of young-Earth creationism.

As a paper published in Palaeontology by researchers led by Dr Yorick Veenma reports, this is the first confirmed fossil of Charnia to be found in Scandinavia. It was found alongside other Ediacaran fossils and is a rare three-dimensional specimen which preserves anatomical details normally obscured in flattened impression.

Despite its superficial resemblance to a fern, Charnia was no plant. It belonged to the rangeomorphs, an extinct group generally interpreted as early animals, although their precise relationships to living animal groups remain debated. We need not claim that Charnia was a direct ancestor of any particular Cambrian animal to appreciate its significance: large organisms with elaborate body structures already existed before the diversification that creationists so often misrepresent as an instantaneous act of creation.

Creationism Refuted - The 'American Cheetah' Was Not A Cheetah - Convergent Evolution

An artistic rendering of two Miracinonyx, one in Beringia preying mainly on fish and one in the Lower 48 feeding on pronghorn antelope.

Credit: Julius Csotonyi (CC-BY SA)

The feline Miracinonyx trumani got its nickname, the “American cheetah,” from its slender, long-limbed body, reminiscent of an African cheetah. While the extinct Pleistocene predator did hunt down speedy prey, such as saiga antelope (illustrated), a new study shows some animals ate a diet of mostly fish, suggesting the species was more adaptable than previously thought.

Velizar Simeonovski

The extinct American ‘cheetah’ was not a cheetah after all | EurekAlert!

A cat can look rather like a cheetah without being a cheetah, and a predator with long legs need not spend its life chasing antelopes. That is the lesson from new research into the extinct “American cheetah”, Miracinonyx trumani, whose ancient DNA and dietary chemistry reveal a more complicated animal than its nickname suggests. It is also another example of why evolutionary relationships have to be investigated through evidence, rather than decided by resemblance and fitted into preconceived categories.

The study, led by Molly Cassatt-Johnstone of the University of California, Santa Cruz, and published in Current Biology, analysed ancient DNA from four specimens. It strengthens earlier evidence that Miracinonyx was more closely related to living pumas than to true cheetahs, with the puma and Miracinonyx lineages estimated to have separated approximately 2.6 million years ago. Its cheetah-like anatomy therefore reflects convergent evolution: the independent evolution of similar features in different lineages.

There is an immediate difficulty here for young-Earth creationism. The evolutionary separation of these cats occurred millions of years before the supposed “Creation Week”, while the three Yukon specimens themselves are approximately 31,000 years old. These were animals living, feeding and dying in an established ecosystem long before the entire universe supposedly existed according to a literal reading of Genesis. Their identification also extends the animal’s known distribution far into northern Canada. Science News.

Refuting Creationism - Bible Mythology Dead And Buried Beneath The Gondwana Supercontinent

Artists impression of the supercontinent Gondwana.

Source: Mark Garlick/Science Photo Library/Getty (Royalty-free)

Reconstruction of Greater Gondwana at ca. 500 Ma or at 550 to 500 Ma compared with conventional paleogeographic interpretations (inset).

From: Tao Wang et al.(2026).

Gondwana really was a supercontinent. And it helped kick-start life on Earth

More than half a billion years before the supposed ‘Creation Week’ of biblical literalism, moving continents were reshaping the planet and helping to establish the environmental conditions in which early animals diversified. That is the inconvenient historical setting of new research into Gondwana: a vast continental assembly whose formation, geological activity and subsequent fragmentation belong to a timescale that bears no resemblance to the few thousand years allowed by young-Earth creationism.

A paper in Science Advances , by Tao Wang of the State Key Laboratory of Deep Earth and Mineral Exploration, Institute of Geology, Beijing, China, and colleagues, suggests that Gondwana was substantially larger than conventional reconstructions show. As co-author Bill Collins explains in his accompanying account in The Conversation, isotopic evidence in granites identifies ancient continental material now concealed beneath younger geological formations across much of Asia. Including these overlooked fragments increases Gondwana’s estimated share of Earth’s continental landmass to roughly 80 per cent, making it a supercontinent even under a restrictive definition of that term. This reconstruction concerns the world of approximately 550–500 million years ago.

Its significance extends beyond redrawing an ancient map. The researchers propose that the reorganisation of plate boundaries associated with Gondwana’s assembly established an enormous belt of volcanic activity. Sustained emissions of greenhouse gases could then have helped alter the climate, contributing to conditions favourable to the diversification of Cambrian life. This is a proposed connection between geological and biological change, rather than a demonstration that volcanism alone caused the Cambrian radiation.

One distinction matters here: despite the article’s headline, this concerns the diversification of life, not its original appearance. Life already had a long evolutionary history before the Cambrian, and animals existed before that period began. Nor was the Cambrian ‘explosion’ an instantaneous event resembling a magical creation. The term describes a geologically rapid evolutionary diversification, unfolding over millions of years.

For creationism, therefore, the problem is more substantial than another inconvenient date. Here is a testable account connecting the history of continents with the environmental context of biological evolution. Continents assemble, plate boundaries change, volcanoes influence the atmosphere, and organisms evolve in the resulting conditions. None of this requires foresight or a predetermined destination. It requires physical processes, evolving populations and the immense passage of time.

Creationism Refuted - How Mammalian Genes Combine to Produce New mRNA - No Magic Required

AI-generated depiction of a chimeric mRNA being formed from two different genes

ChatGPT 6 Astra

A watercolor painting depicts chimeric mRNAs.

Image: Hannah Davis/Jackson Lab.

Mammalian Genes Can Combine To Make Previously Unknown mRNAs, Proteins | Harvard Medical School

An immune system that saves your life in one circumstance can help kill you in another makes sense in the light of evolution: natural selection favours advantages whose benefits outweigh their costs under prevailing conditions, without guaranteeing safety in every eventuality. For creationists who present biological complexity as evidence of perfect intelligent design, however, such compromises require some explaining.

A new study published in Nature on 2 September 2026 provides a particularly revealing example. Researchers found that mammalian cells can join RNA sequences copied from separate genes into a combined message. One resulting protein improves antibacterial defence in mice, but also increases vulnerability to lethal inflammatory responses in experimental models of sepsis. The same molecular mechanism brings both protection and danger.

To understand the discovery, think of DNA as a collection of stored recipes. Messenger RNA, or mRNA, is a working copy that a cell uses to assemble a protein. Scientists have long known that cells can edit these copies, allowing a single gene to produce different proteins. Here, the researchers investigated messages containing material from different genes, sometimes located on different chromosomes. It is rather like making a new recipe by combining instructions from two separate cookbooks. The joining occurs at the RNA level; it does not require the original DNA recipes to merge.

These combined messages are called chimeric RNAs. Crucially, the team demonstrated that one produces a functional protein, named GSDMD–TMEM106A, during inflammation in mice. Most of the other candidate messages have yet to be shown to produce functional proteins, so the discovery should not be mistaken for proof that every detected combination has a useful role.

The evolutionary interest lies in the consequences. Strengthening an inflammatory response can help an animal resist infection, yet the resulting damage can become lethal. Weakening that response can reduce the danger from inflammation while leaving the animal less able to control bacteria. There is no simple setting at which “more immunity” always means “better health”.

This is precisely the sort of trade-off evolutionary biology helps us understand. Natural selection works with inherited mechanisms and their competing consequences; it has neither foresight nor a commitment to the welfare of every individual or to the perfect solution. The study does not reconstruct the evolutionary history of this particular protein, but its findings illustrate why a useful biological feature need not be harmless, let alone perfect. For intelligent-design advocates, the question is therefore more demanding than “Is it complicated?” It is why an allegedly flawless designer’s protective machinery comes with the capacity to inflict fatal damage on the organism it protects.

Creationism Refuted - A Cretaceous Dinosaur From Brazil With A Close Relative From Spain - From 120 Million Years Ago

AI-generated impression of Dasosaurus tocantinensis in the Cretaceous.

ChatGPT 6 Astra

Artistic reconstruction of the new dinosaur from Maranhão state. It was 20 meters long and had a European relative .

Paleoart: Jorge Blanco.

New long-necked dinosaur found in Northeast Brazil was a close relative of a European species

A newly described giant dinosaur from Brazil presents creationists with more than the familiar problem of a fossil vastly older than their supposed creation of the Universe. Its evolutionary relationships also preserve evidence of a world whose geography has changed profoundly: continents separating, ancestral populations dispersing, and related lineages following different evolutionary paths. This is precisely the sort of historical pattern we expect when common descent operates on a planet reshaped by plate tectonics.

The dinosaur, Dasosaurus tocantinensis, was approximately 20 metres long and lived around 120 million years ago, during the Early Cretaceous. Its remains were discovered during construction of a road–rail terminal at Davinópolis, in the north-eastern Brazilian state of Maranhão. Described by Elver Luiz Mayer and colleagues in the Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, it has its closest known evolutionary relative in what is now Spain. The researchers interpret this affinity as evidence that its ancestors probably reached South America from Europe via North Africa between about 140 and 120 million years ago.

That proposed route needs to be understood against the geography of the time. Africa and South America had not yet completed their separation, and connections between landmasses offered opportunities for dispersal that the modern map conceals. The finding therefore concerns ancestral movements through an ancient landscape, rather than dinosaurs somehow crossing the present-day Atlantic.

The broader evolutionary principle is straightforward. Populations can spread when geographical connections permit; when barriers interrupt gene flow, their descendants can diverge. Consequently, relationships between species should reflect both their ancestry and the changing opportunities for movement and isolation. Evolutionary biology supplies the explanation for the branching relationships, while plate tectonics supplies the changing geographical setting. This particular fossil does not, by itself, prove that continental separation caused a specific speciation event, but its affinities fit the larger picture remarkably well.

For young-Earth creationism, the difficulty is therefore both chronological and explanatory. A dinosaur living 120 million years ago cannot be accommodated within a literal Genesis chronology. Nor does the assertion that a creator suddenly produced separate “kinds” explain why their anatomical relationships should correspond to ancient geographical connections. Common descent makes that correspondence intelligible; magical creation provides no comparable prediction.

What emerges is a history of life unfolding on a changing Earth, with neither continents nor their inhabitants fixed in their present arrangements. Understanding that history requires evidence, evolutionary relationships and deep time — all conspicuously absent from the biblical creation account.

Creationism Refuted - Complex Symbiosis Between Animals And Microbes - 550 Million Years Before 'Creation Week'

Ediacaran tubular fossil Conotubus (inset: symbiotic chemosynthetic bacteria)

AI-generated image (ChatGPT 6 Astra)

Ancient fossil from China reveals animal-microbe partnerships dating back 550 million years

Some 550 million years ago, long before the world existed according to a literal reading of Genesis, an early animal may already have been exploiting the biochemical abilities of bacteria. New research on the Ediacaran tubular fossil Conotubus suggests that animal–microbe partnerships have a history extending back towards the beginnings of animal life. For creationism, the inconvenience is twofold: the immense timescale, and a biological arrangement that makes excellent evolutionary sense but raises awkward questions about supposedly intelligent design.

The study, led by Zhenfei Wang and Yongbo Peng of Nanjing University and published in PNAS, examined sulphur and molybdenum isotope signatures in fossils from southern China. These suggest an association with sulphur-oxidising bacteria, potentially supplying nutrition and helping the animal tolerate toxic, sulphide-rich conditions. This is a geochemical inference, rather than the discovery of preserved bacterial partners. If the interpretation is correct, however, it extends the fossil evidence for animal–microbe symbiosis backwards by roughly 100 million years, as co-author Peter Crockford explains in his account of the research in an article in The Conversation.

Creationists often present such interdependence as evidence of design, as though two organisms benefiting from one another could only be the result of someone planning the arrangement. But this overlooks an obvious question: why would an omniscient designer make an animal dependent on another organism for a useful biochemical function? Why not equip the animal itself with the necessary machinery? A partnership introduces additional requirements: the organisms must encounter one another or maintain their association across generations, exchange useful substances, and sustain conditions in which both can function. Each dependency creates something else that can fail.

There is a qualification here. Giving an animal bacterial capabilities would not necessarily be as simple as inserting a few genes into its genome. Genes operate within cellular systems; useful metabolism also requires appropriate regulation, enzymes, transport mechanisms and chemical conditions. Division of labour between organisms can therefore be highly effective. Nevertheless, these are constraints facing organisms produced by evolution. An allegedly omnipotent designer, able to specify the entire system from the outset, cannot readily be excused by invoking the limitations of inherited cellular machinery. Complexity alone is no evidence of intelligent planning, especially when it includes dependence on a separate organism to supply an essential service.

As I argued in The Unintelligent Designer: Refuting the Intelligent Design Hoax complexity is not the evidence for intelligent design that creationists like to think since the hallmark of good, intelligent design is minimal complexity. Complexity is evidence of evolved systems where suboptimal solutions to problems often need additional layers of complexity to mitigate failures.

Creationism In Crisis - Scientists Witness How First Complex Cells May Have Formed

3D segmentation analysis of the tomogram showing the identified inner membrane (blue), outer layer (teal), putative ribosomes (gray), extracellular fibers (light orange), and intracellular filament (light green).

From: Nobs S, Johnson M, Williams T, et al. (2026)

A composite image of the Asgard archaeon (inset) found within the microbial mats of Shark Bay, Western Australia.

Image: Iain Duggin, Debnath Ghosal, Brendan Burns

‘First contact’ that may have led to complex life on Earth finally witnessed by scientists

The origin of the eukaryotic cell was one of the most consequential transitions in the history of life. Every animal, plant, fungus and protist is composed of eukaryotic cells—cells containing a nucleus and an elaborate internal organisation that is absent from bacteria and archaea. Without that ancient evolutionary innovation, there would have been no plants, no animals and, of course, no humans.

Yet eukaryotic cells appear not to have arisen through the sudden creation of an entirely new kind of organism. The evidence increasingly indicates that they emerged through an extended evolutionary association between previously independent microorganisms. An archaeal host formed a close relationship with at least one bacterium, and a descendant of an alphaproteobacterium eventually became the mitochondrion—the energy-processing organelle still present in almost every eukaryotic cell. Other cellular features evolved before, during or after this extraordinary merger.

Precisely how that relationship began remains one of evolutionary biology’s most difficult questions. The event occurred billions of years ago, microorganisms rarely leave informative fossils, and the organisms involved have long since disappeared. Scientists must therefore reconstruct the process by combining comparative genomics, cell biology, phylogenetics and observations of living microorganisms whose biology may preserve clues to those ancient interactions.

Now an international research team led by scientists at the University of New South Wales, the University of Technology Sydney and the University of Melbourne has observed something tantalisingly suggestive. As described in an open-access paper in Current Biology, the researchers cultivated a previously unknown member of the Asgard archaea from a microbial mat associated with the stromatolites of Gathaagudu, or Shark Bay, Western Australia.

Creationism Refuted - Recovering DNA from Extinct Galápagos Giant Tortoises

The Pinzón saddleback tortoise, a small giant tortoise species native to Pinzón Island in the Galápagos characterized by a saddle-like curve in its shell.

Credit: Evelyn Jensen

Dome-shelled Galápagos giant tortoise, Chelonoidis nigra

By Mfield, Matthew Field, http://www.photography.mattfield.com - Own work,
CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

Reading the giant tortoise DNA that time forgot | Yale News

Few places are more closely associated with evolutionary biology than the Galápagos Islands. Their isolation has repeatedly divided colonising populations into smaller groups, allowing mutation, genetic drift and natural selection to produce distinct island lineages. Yet their subsequent history has not always resembled a neatly branching tree. Occasional migration—and, more recently, the deliberate movement of animals by humans—has brought formerly isolated populations back into contact, permitting them to interbreed and exchange genes.

The evolutionary radiation of the Galápagos giant tortoises is a particularly striking example. Thirteen living and four extinct lineages are currently recognised within the Chelonoidis complex, each descended from the same ancestral colonisation but subsequently differentiated by geographical isolation. Unfortunately, centuries of exploitation by sailors and settlers devastated many populations, leaving some lineages represented only by bones preserved in museums.

Those remains retain a record of their evolutionary history, but reading it is difficult. DNA begins to fragment and chemically deteriorate after death, while contamination from microorganisms and people can overwhelm the surviving genetic material. In some of the museum specimens examined in a new study, researchers could read less than one per cent of the original genome—far too little for many conventional methods of genomic comparison.

However, a team led by researchers at Yale University has now developed a computational approach capable of extracting reliable evolutionary information from such exceptionally incomplete genomes. As described in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, the researchers analysed dried bones from five historical specimens and placed their surviving DNA fragments upon a reference phylogeny constructed from high-quality genomes belonging to living and other historical tortoises.

Importantly, the researchers did not manufacture plausible sequences to fill the gaps. Their analytical pipeline was designed to recover the phylogenetic and population-genetic signal present in ultra-low-coverage genomes without imputing the missing genotypes. Even at sequencing depths as low as 0.008 times the genome, the surviving fragments contained enough mutually consistent information to reveal where the specimens belonged.

The results confirmed that the bones represented two evolutionarily distinct, now-extinct lineages: the former tortoises of Santa Fe and an extinct San Cristóbal lineage different from the population still living on that island. These were not merely unusual individuals belonging to surviving populations but genetically distinguishable branches of the wider Galápagos tortoise radiation.