"Actually, it appears to falsify one aspect of common descent"
Right. In the same way, there are any number of experiments which might falsify one aspect of ID or Creationism, without destroying the whole thing. This has happened several times in Creationism, for anyone who remembers the "Canopy Theory". Creationism is just as falsifiable or unfalsifiable as evolution, as is the obvious result of our conversation.
I have not been a part of this thread lately, but if I may.
Johnny, you mention the canopy theory and falsification.
From my reading of the creationist websites, the ideas such as "canopy" are not true theories, but simply "what-ifs." They appear to be generated by (some) creationists as scientists examine previous ideas and explain how unlikely they are. When one idea is cast into doubt, another pops up.
Rather than theories, with all of the research and verification that theories require, its more like, "Yeah, that may be so, but what if..."
From that point on, some folks cling to each idea in spite of any evidence to the contrary, as we see periodically on these threads. Other folks come up with a new explanation for the phenomenon and go with that until serious objections are raised.
Again, I hope I am not intruding or misreading the post. And I have not yet reached the end of the thread (too much real world intruding on FR time lately).
Yes, CR makes definite predictions. The "Great Flood" part was shown to be false in the late 1700s.
This is one way it differs from ID, which is in principle incapable of making predictions.