Response
Similarities demonstrate a single Designer, not a common ancestor. These animals are “related” to varying degrees, but only in the sense that they share common design from the same Designer.
For instance, some books are similar because they have the same author, not because they have the same ancestor. Likewise, some paintings are similar because they have the same painter, not because they have the same ancestor, while some buildings are similar because they have the same architect, and not because they have the same ancestor. Likewise, life shares similarities because it has the same Creator, not because it has the same ancestor.
Think about it from another perspective: How would God create life to have no similarities at all? It would be nearly impossible: no two animals could have any DNA, no two animals could have a backbone, or blood, or bones in general. If this were even possible, it would be extremely chaotic and weird, something that a perfect Designer would not do. Thus, similarities are to be expected in the life that God creates, and this is not evidence for evolution.
A variation of this argument is the “evolutionary tree of life” argument, which states that life’s nested structure (groups within groups without groups, etc.) is evidence that all life is descended from a common ancestor.
Site Under Construction
This site is still under construction. It needs more references, citations, and debate arguments. If you would like to help, please view the community page.
Sources
Dawkins, R. (2004). The Ancestor's Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Notes
- Dawkins, 2004, p. 23: “Let me explain what I mean by ‘range of overlaps.’ Even when taken from extremely distant relations, for example humans and bacteria, large sections of DNA still unequivocally resemble each other. And very close relations, such as humans and chimpanzees, have much more DNA in common. If you choose your molecules judiciously, there is a complete spectrum of steadily increasing proportions of shared DNA, all the way in between. Molecules can be chosen which, between them, span the gamut of comparison, from remote cousins like humans and bacteria, to close cousins like two species of frogs.” ↩