Humans and Chimpanzees are related.

So you say we haven't observed it before even looking at my link? Um ok then. You can have any world view you want, But that doesn't automatically make that world view accurate with reality. your art analogy is horrible, For one we know that art has a creator, We can observe that it being created is the only known way in which art is created, And we know that art does not reproduce let alone change with variation. If we can verify that evolutionary theory is accurate "which we have" then there are certain processes and events that must have happened in lifes history on earth, Such as all life diversifying from a single common ancestor. All life on this planet uses the same triple letter code for protein synthesis, All life on this planet uses DNA and RNA as instruction carriers for protein synthesis, This combined with the minimal genome example I gave in my previous argument is all evidence for all life sharing a common ancestor with a living thing that had this natural configuration. From what I understand your operating under the ideology of "so that's what it seems to suggest, But is that what really happened? " which is understandable, But here is the thing, Its called evidence and prediction capability, You see the thing about a scientific theory is that it has explanatory power, Which means that if this theory is correct, It can make predictions on what we should find in certain criteria, So lets put mine and your ideology to a test of accuracy and predictive capability. ME: All life is related and diversified from a single common ancestor at some point in the distant past -Predictions *Species that split off from each other more recently will share more genes then those who split off earlier. *The fossil record will remain consistent to its time period "you will never find a rabbit in the Cambrian". *The fossil record and genetics will show life becoming simpler and less diversified further back in time you look. *Multicellier life will eventually give way to single celled life further back you look in the fossil record. *You will find evidence of different air composition as life spread throughout the planet. *Evolution should be observed in living organisms on some scale. *Transitional fossils should exist. YOU: All life is not directly related and all came from originally one pair of said species at some point in the past. -Predictions *Species that are more physically alike will share more of the same genes and gene expression then those that are not. *The fossil record will show massive variation with all different types of animals showing up at random time periods. *The fossil record and genetics will show life remaining roughly the same in variance discounting extinction events. *Multicellier life will never give way to single celled life at any point in the fossil record. *You will never find evidence of a different air composition at some point in the past as modern species would not survive. *Evolution will never be observed in any living organisms on any scale. *Transitional fossils should not exist. These are all predictions that should hold if one is correct and the other is not, And the problem is mine fills every prediction successfully without error, While your worldview with its predictions of what we should find if its true falls flat on its arse in failure.