That would DISPROVE evolution.
As long as the building blocks were similar it would do no such thing. IOW if "nature" is able to produce what science is able to investigate apart from intelligence or design, there is nothing to prevent nature from producing a dandelion with legs. Ever heard of a walking stick?
That would DISPROVE evolution.
Gosh, I hope NOT! Some are saying that Evolution sez that plants and animals have a common ancestor. You have strayed from the plantation in their eyes. I hope you don't get derision piled upon you by "them" (and yes, by "them" I do mean the giant ants from the 1950's sci-fi movie).
Say-y-y-y...what is your vocation, anyway? Are you even qualified to post on this subject?
Be that as it may, anyone following my argument with critical thinking skills would reason (correctly) that the existence of Evolution is essential to my argument. Remember, I am arguing that Evolution is inadequate to 'splain, Lucy, how we arrived at what we are today. Intelligent design does do that, does it not?
Does ID at this time require faith in something science has not yet measured? Unequivocally "yes"! As does believing that there was a "Big Bang" from nothing that somehow, billions of years later, caused lightning to strike in a primordial soup (yes, I know: Evolution doesn't concern itself with primary forms. Please see "inadequate" and it's synonyms:
bare, barren, bush league, deficient, depleted, dry, failing, faulty, feeble, found wanting, glitch*, imperfect, impotent, inappreciable, inapt, incapable, incommensurate, incompetent, incomplete, inconsiderable, insubstantial, junk*, lacking, lame*, lemon*, lousy, low, meager, minus, miserly, niggardly, not enough, parsimonious, poor, scanty, scarce, short, shy*, sketchy*, skimpy*, sleazy, small, spare, sparse, sterile, stinted, stunted*, thin*, too little, unequal, unproductive, unqualified, weak) that began an abiogenesis (also called autogenesis or spontaneous generation) that resulted in a chain of incredibly lucky events that led to the evolution of every disparate kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species and that has thus far yielded an advanced, top-of-the-food-chain, creature that possesses so many nonadaptive attributes that it must be the luckiest creature in the history of Evolution to not to have become and evolutionary dead-end and survived to this day!
Why, to be so lucky defies the odds! It almost makes me believe that there was some kind of "plan" or "design" to this "evolution" theory! (now that's sarcasm)!