How does similar DNA evidence evolution?
Similarity by itself does not evidence evolution. Matching phylogenies of DNA and morphology do evidence evolution. Read more here:
"Mere similarity between organisms is not enough to support macroevolution; the nested classification pattern produced by a branching evolutionary process, such as common descent, is much more specific than simple similarity."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#nested_hierarchy
A common designer can not explain this pattern which is a nested hierarchy. Things like cars, paintings, and buildings do not fall into a nested hierarchy. Only evolution produces this pattern of both similarities and differences, and it is the exact pattern we see in life.
Where did the DNA come from to begin with?
We don't need to know where DNA came from in order to know that life evolved from a common ancestor.
You can conveniently discount the need for the full story if you want but that's like my giving partial directions to somewhere....
You can give directions to somewhere without needing to know the origin of the universe, or did you forget that.
Should we throw out DNA fingerprinting in court cases because we don't know the origin of DNA?
Do we have to throw away the Germ Theory of Disease because we don't know the ultimate origin of life?
Do we have to know the origin of the universe in order to know how lightning is made?
you will never get where you want to be if you don't have all the info and you will never conclude evolution as fact without all the equation, unless you are one of the small minded that choose to forget the basic necessities for finding a solution to anything.
No one is saying that we shouldn't look for the answers. In fact, scientists are studying these questions as we speak. What we are saying is that you don't have to know everything in order to know something.