Of course science would try to understand it. But it would overthrough evolution, particularly if it was a large, multicelled organism lving among us.
Finding a simple, alternate form of biochemistry half a mile down in the earth would merely be interesting.
Give me an example of something that truly disproves evolution. This doesn't.
I have seen an analogy for the falsification of an idea which I like very much. It is comparable to cutting down a tree. If you cut the trunk of the tree, the tree dies. Similarly if you falsify a basic idea of a theory, the theory is shot. An example of such would be finding a completely different biochemistry existing among the species currently known. If you cut a few smaller branches of the tree, the tree survives. However, if you cut enough of the branches of a tree, the tree will die. Similarly if you falsify a few details of the theory, the theory will still survive. That would be the case, for example, if the idea that birds and mammals both evolved from reptiles were to be falsified. In and of itself, that wouldn't falsify evolution. However, if we found that a large majority of the evolutionary relationships that are theorized by evolution were false, it might start to cast doubt on the whole idea of evolution.