Ah the classic, "Your body evolved to let you know when things will kill you". That's usually a successful evolutionary process.
'evolving' as a verb is incredibly misleading. There is no active process that is 'evolving'. The body didn't 'realize' that this was useful so it kept it. There was no 'success'. We're merely looking at survival bias.
When scientists say that X is probably because of evolution, they don't really explain how X happened. Just a random genetic copying error, not anything exciting. Instead, they are saying that 'not X' has disappeared because those individuals had a higher chance to die before reproducing.
Saying "they evolved to..." is just short hand for "others were more likely to die so X won out".
And by that I don't mean that you made a bad choice, just when the terms were introduced.
The paper mentions that in 1977 a Robert Crabtree predicted that copper(I) would be a likely coordination site. Copper is a pretty reactive metal when it comes to sulfur, and lets it do all sorts of stuff.
Here is a tangentially related post from In The Pipeline:
Which discusses some derivatives of selenium, the element directly below sulfur on the periodic table.
From personal experience, you can get used to the way sulfur compounds smell. Amines, and other functional groups stay vile.