Originally Posted by CTD

Any "convergence / parallel evolution" at all renders the issue of "homology" useless for the evo-pusher at best. If you posit a rule that looking alike makes things related, you have to stick to that rule. You're not allowed to make exceptions - not in science. Any exception forces abandonment of the rule or abandonment of scientific principles, even if it were only one. Special pleading is special pleading - period.

And that ain't all. Check this out:
Quote
It is incredible that the descendants of two organisms, which had originally differed in a marked manner, should ever afterwards converge so closely as to lead to a near approach to identity throughout their whole organisation.


Guess who. Go on, guess.

That's from Chapter 4 of the sacred evotext - that's Charles Darwin himself.

http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species-6th-edition/chapter-04.html

See for yourself. Even he didn't have so much faith in the evogoddess of luck! "Convergent evolution" is officially un-Darwinian.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson