==What creationists need to show to break this link is a highly functional sequence that is not conserved between members of closely related lineages.
Modular DESIGN explains highly conserved functional sequences far better than Darwin’s fanciful creation myth. At the same time, Creation also explains non-conserved functional sequences. No matter which way you slice it, Creation provides the better explanation...hands down.
Creationism does NOTHING to explain the nested hierarchy of similarity and divergence one finds among closely related species that makes functional sequences highly conserved and nonfunctional sequences diverge at the neutral mutation rate.
What is the creationist explanation for why all primates have the same frame-shift mutation in the GULO gene for vitamin C synthesis?
What is the creationist explanation for why, if you find the same ERV sequence in a human and a gorilla it will also be in a chimp; and be more divergent than ones found only in humans and chimps (which will be more divergent than ones found only in humans, which will be more divergent than ones found only is some human populations)?
And no, little Russian dolls do not explain it.