The reason why the Aussie Evos were so surprised is because there expectation was refuted by reality. Obviously there is something very wrong about the theory that is informing their expectations.
What’s funny about today’s silly piece you’ve posted is that even if we disregard your article’s artful dodging of what the original findings actually said - which would certainly make me take down the OP as a clear lie - but the bigger picture of what Australian marsupials mean for the creation myth.
Do creationists ask why God put all these highly unique and highly adapted marsupials down in Australia? Do they ask why marsupials are so successful there but only moderately so in the Americas and not at all elsewhere? Do they know what island biogeography means and that the Creator must have been a huge fan of it?
> The reason why the Aussie Evos were so surprised is
> because there expectation was refuted by reality.
Reading the good doctor’s actual words, instead of her words cherry picked and misinterpreted, would definitely give you a different view.
The basic toolkit of a milk bearing tetrapod with fur is there, but the idea that the kangaroo is “more like” or “as much like” humans as chimps are is ludicrous. In fact, they’re more dissimilar than any placental mammals, such as mice.