Do common structures within organisms really prove common descent?
Homology=Evolution?
Chase Jones
Lincoln Ward
Given the various additional facts they strongly support common descent as a scientific theory.
Owen Turner
>various additional facts
Such as?
Easton Adams
They dont prove it but they are good evidence
Its genetic relationships that rove it
John Thompson
>prove
there is no proof in Science
Lrn2science pleb
Jace Gray
There is also covergent evolution
Zachary Diaz
Science can't "prove" anything
Jacob Kelly
Leo Peterson
Fossil record requiring constant introduction of new species to exist in its current form.
Basic observable facts of inheritance and mutation.
Hybrids, Ring species, speciation.
Various vestigial traits or development pathways (I think development pathways would be the right way to say it. Think along the lines of subjecting an Axolotl to different conditions during development so that it develops past its default "larval" state).
The observable genetic distance (On correct homologous gene sequences that aren't subject to large selective pressure) between different species based on the constant statistical rate of mutation.
Those kinds of facts.
Those are distinct from homologies though and typically don't fulfill homology criteria.
William Scott
i think thats more analogy .