Clearly, "evolutionary theories" are much harder to support than "intelligent design" ones. I feel well rewarded in my conscious choice to support the idea of intelligent design.

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/genetics/dn13854-platypus-genome-is-as-weird-as-its-looks.html

18:00 07 May 2008

NewScientist.com news service

Emma Young

(break)"
Ancient milk

Biologists already knew that the platypus has a weird complement of sex chromosomes, but the team found that the gene sequences responsible for determining sex are more like a bird's than a mammal's.

And while the gene that the human sex-determining gene evolved from is present in the platypus genome, it seems to have nothing to do with sex determination. So, that function must have evolved after the platypus split from our common ancestor, about 166 million years ago.

However, by that time, milk production was well-evolved. The platypus has the same repertoire of milk protein genes as a cow or a human. Clearly, milk evolved long before we evolved to give birth to live offspring, says team member Jenny Graves at the Australian National University in Canberra."

What was the "accidental" gene-drifing origin/process of milk-producing genes? How would irreducibly complex structures, secretion, regulation be worked out without some foresight?

Or, as has been suggested by thought experimenters, early evolutionary platypusses "foetuses" just started "knowing" to suck on a sweat gland, (why-y-y? if not divine inspiration?) and things improved/evolved ?gradually from there? :-/

Can this complex process be even ***1%*** described without controversy and with any real certainty? I can visualise an unfathomable higher intelligence designer, bored with Rigelian public television, coming up with the idea, and wanting to try it out, though.

While waiting, while the jury is out, the discussion following the on-line article is ....entertaining, maybe about as good as Rigelian public television.