What ID proponents are encouraging in the greater scientific community is honesty about the fact that both design and ancestry can create genetic similarity.
On Monday, I will look at the consistency of the phylogenetically informative sites for the Baum et al. (2016) paper. Spoiler alert: It looks like design.
Only the infusion of new information from outside the system can explain these bursts of biological creativity.
These incongruent or homoplastic characters are a notorious problem for phylogenetics and contradict the evolutionary prediction of a nested hierarchy.
Evolutionists have all the evidence they need in genes and morphology to draw the one true tree of life. Or do they?