From what I can gather, the author postulates that the human genome is deteriorating, and this is evidence against Darwinian evolution. This is another argument — in a long line of many others — that basically amounts to the same bullshit: natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life on earth.
Interestingly, Michael Lynch used a similar argument (albeit without supernatural forces) in describing the evolution of the eukaryotic genome. Lynch used the nearly neutral theory to show that the complexity of eukaryotic genomes may be the result decreased population size in eukaryotes (relative to prokaryotes). The strength of selection depends on population size (Ns, so selection is stronger in large populations), and eukaryotes have smaller populations than prokaryotes. Therefore, the complex features of the eukaryotic genome were able to evolve due to relaxed selective constraint in smaller populations.
Thinking about it this way, our genome is actually just a degenerated bacterial genome. It’s not surprising, then, to see degeneration along the human lineage as our ancestors for the past tens of millions of years have lived in small populations. See, no need to invoke supernatural forces when the real world provides more than enough mechanisms.
(Via The Scientific Indian.)