Let me give you another example whereby we see a specific pattern which common ancestry
requires, and is easily falsifiable since MANY other possibilities COULD have been observed:
This paper describes a pattern of similarities (and differences) within the olfactory genes of Orangutans, Gorillas, Chimps, and humans, that is consistent with the theory that Orangutans branched off first, Gorillas next, and finally Chimps and Humans.
As you can see from the image (provided by
Biologos--Note that the Gorilla unique mutation number in the Biologos article appears to be in error, as the paper identifies 5 instead of 6):
There are 6 mutations which we share with all three other species.
There are 9 that we share with only Chimpanzee and Gorilla
And 12 which we share with only Chimps.
It is important to note that the mutations identified silence the expression of the gene in which they are contained (not to worry, there are more than 1000 of them, hence our ability to still smell).
There are no mutations which are shared with just chimps and orangutans (a diversion from the nested hierarchy). There are none which are shared with just gorilla and human (diversion). Same with Chimp and gorilla, human and orangutan, and gorilla and orangutan.
Clearly, the pattern doesn't have to exist, as any one of the combinations in my previous paragraph COULD be observed. But they aren't.
And the pattern matches exactly the pattern found with ERVs.
So I ask you, how do you explain this shared pattern between broken olfactory genes and ERVs without common ancestry? Because, not only does common ancestry explain it beautifully, it is the required result for common ancestry to be true.