The same patterns we see forming in divergent populations of known common ancestry are the same pattern we see in different species of likely common ancestry.
“As I have already explained to you” includes numerous laughable and preposterous claims, as well as cites to papers that do not say what you claim they say; and your laughable claim that it is a “logical impossibility” for humans and chimps to be more similar in DNA than either is to a gorilla.
So much for the insight of a Creationist. It leads you to believe that the truth (humans and chimps are more similar in DNA than either is to a gorilla) is a “logical impossibility”.
Laughable.
==But it would have to have been done in a manner such that it would fool people into believing in common descent of species.
It’s quite the other way around. The Evos have fooled themselves into believing that nested hierarchies are the product of RM + NS, even though man, who is made in God’s image, routinely DESIGNS using nested hierarchies.
==The same patterns we see forming in divergent populations of known common ancestry are the same pattern we see in different species of likely common ancestry.
Again, what of it? If God created using modular designs, then we would expect that morphologically similar organisms would have similar modular design components that are what the Evos call “conserved.” However, creation also explains why non-conserved regions are functional, whereas neo-Darwinian evolution does not. Like I said, creation is the far superior explanation, hands down.