[BroJoeK]

from the article: "More specifically, they found out that 9 out of 10 animal species on the planet came to being at the same time as humans did some 100,000 to 200,000 years ago."

Here's the key fact that everyone needs to understand: we're playing word-definition games here, beginning with, "what is a species" and "when or how does a certain species become not that species?"

So when they say, "90% of 'species' originated from 100,000 to 200,000 years ago," all that means is natural genetic drifts, from one generation to the next can accumulate enough changes such that after, say, 100,000 to 200,000 years we define them as a new "species".
So ask those same scientists, "fine, 100,000 to 200,000 years for current species, how many years since each new genus?"

Answer: around 1 million years.
What about new biological families?
Answer: around 10 million years.
What about new biological orders?
Answer: about 50 million years.
What about new biological classes?
Answer: maybe 150 million years.

Etc., Etc.
Point is, this study does not imply there were no species before 100,000 to 200,000 years ago, only that our definition of "species" last about 100,000 to 200,000 years before, ahem, changing into something we define as a different "species".

[PIF]

Their methodology in the PDF link reads like an opinion poll and the whole bit about species is a side issue in the paper - they are really looking at mitochondrial DNA: Why should mitochondria define species?

[HarleyD]

I'm not a geneticist but your explanation sounds extremely basic and like something every geneticist would/should understand. I would hope that such a simple understanding would have been factored into their research.

But regardless, your explanation still leads to the same conclusion; that it is POSSIBLE for everything to have been created basically at the same time. In fact, given your explanation, you are still saying the same thing, that at some point the clock started ticking for all the species to arrive at the natural genetic drift end in order to have 90% of all species the same. If this were not so, then you would see a far greater variation from that 90% for all sorts of species.

I'm not a geneticist but I do know a bit about statistics.