Yeah, that study (if a bit more subtley) ALSO assumes evolution, and has little point or basis if genomes are NOT evolving (have not evolved) across macroevolutionary distances.
==and has little point or basis if genomes are NOT evolving (have not evolved) across macroevolutionary distances.
Unless, as the field of epigentics is increasingly proving, mutations are primarily non-random and directed. If such is the case, genetic evidence for the neo-Darwinian notion of common descent would just be more wishful thinking on the part of the Church of Darwin.
http://www.iscid.org/papers/Borger_SharedMutations_061506.pdf