[ahayes]

The facts are then arranged to achieve a preconceived outcome. You can visualize what the result would be if humans also had the virus allele. The little tree would have remained the same.

You're objecting to scientists modifying their theory to conform to the evidence??

If humans also had this insert, then of course the tree would remain them same--the evidence would not disprove it. As it is, the evidence allows us to clarify the evolutionary divergence. You say that the idea that humans are most closely related to chimpanzees is a "preconceived notion." The implication is that this is also a baseless notion. In fact this conclusion was drawn from scientific evidence.

The theory of evolution actually would predict instances like this as long as the organisms diverge within a relatively small timeframe.

[AndrewC]

You're objecting to scientists modifying their theory to conform to the evidence??

They didn't modify anything. Look at the table. No matter what the results of the experiment they would have come up with the same tree. In actuality the universe of possibilities for this test(3 classes sharing something) is exactly two. All the same or odd man out. All the same results in the preconceived tree and the odd man out is easily handled to give the same tree. That I call Darwininan logic.