OK, maybe you're right. I truly like to understand what they've discovered over the past centuries. Can you explain me what is that? I promise I will leave my assumptions behind until I understand those discoveries. Help me out, please.
Consider endogenous retroviruses. For those unfamiliar, the nutshell version:
Everyone's generally familiar with viruses; they're little blobs of protein and nucleic acid that somehow co-opt cells into helping them procreate. Their impact ranges from the totally benign (like cool tulip colors) to the unmercifully malignant (like many of the world's worst diseases). Usually, they enter a cell and then their kids depart to infect other cells.
Some viruses, however, actually "infect" the host cell's nucleus itself. Called retroviruses
, they too range from pointless to insidious -- the AIDS virus (HIV) being perhaps the most notable example. The key thing to note is that the virus becomes a part of of the host organism's actual DNA. If a typical retrovirus infects my liver, then it'll probably remain in my liver until I'm dead. If it's in my skin, it'll probably remain in my skin until I'm dead. Etc.
But if a retrovirus is lucky enough to infect my sex organs, it will become a part of my offspring's DNA as well, and will then be what scientists call an endogenous retrovirus
(ERV). Since the way we get an ERV is through a parent, if two individuals share an ERV, it demonstrates that they had a common ancestor with the ERV.
And this is the interesting part. There are ERVs that we share with chimpanzees. There are ERVs that we share with chimpanzees and gorillas. There are ERVs that we share with chimpanzees, gorillas, and monkeys. Etc. But I know of no
ERVs that we share with monkeys that aren't shared with chimps. Etc.
Remember, the key point of ERVs is that they show a common ancestor.
Personally, I've never seen more convincing data supporting evolution than ERVs. I suppose that nothing is indisputable, but I can't even conceive of a way to dispute their particular testimony.