Or it could be proof of a common Builder.
No, it couldn't. Here's why:
Your common "Builder" is omnipotent, and therefore, his agency is unfalsifiable
. There is no possible obervation that could disprove his agency, because anything can be explained away with his magic.
Evolution doesn't get to fall back on magic. Evolution is falsifiable.
For example: evolution makes the very risky claim that all life descends from a common ancestor, and is therefore all related, and that therefore, there is a 'family tree' pattern to the relationships of the various lifeforms on Earth. Because we know that genes are the mechanism of inheritance, it follows that morphological similarities would map pretty cleanly onto genetic similarities. We would expect a horse to have more in common genetically with a donkey than say, a watermelon. If we compared the DNA of a horse, a donkey, and a watermelon, and found the horse to have more in common genetically with the watermelon than the donkey, well...that'd kill evolutionary theory dead, right there on the spot. Evolution would be falsified
then. But creationism wouldn't be, because you always have magic to fall back on. You don't have to work within any set of rules, certainly not the laws of physics or chemistry or biology, or even logic. Anything goes!
Likewise the statement that humans and chimps are closely related. This statement predicts strong genetic similarities. If we aren't
genetically very much like chimps, the hypothesis is dead. Guess what? Our genes are
very similar to those of chimps. And slightly less similar to those of gorillas, and slightly less still to orangutans, and then gibbons, and then monkeys...all these gradations of genetic similarity are exactly what evolution predicts. But with an ominpotent god, any similarity or difference can be hand-waved away with magic; god's artistic imperative.
A classic non-biological example is starlight. We know how to tell how far away stars are by measuring their redshift, and from this we know that some stars are billions of light years away, which means that the light had to travel for billions of years to reach us, which means the universe has to be billions, not thousands of years old. No problem for the YEC, he just invokes magic of some kind to get around this. God stretches light or bends time or something to create the illusion
of distance for just those stars that are more than 6000 light years away. When the laws of physics get in the way, ignore them!
Your "Builder" is unfalsifiable. There can be no proof of his existence because you've defined him such that there can be no dis
proof. So, no: It could not be proof of a common Builder.
If someone comes and tells us that this evidence wasn't interpreted from the outset with the point of view that evolution is an absolute fact, it would concern me.
Of course it was, Wes. Do you really think we're still at the point where we're trying to figure out whether evolution is true? Of course not. We're way past that. The question's been settled. We've moved on.
Do you really think when NASA sends probes out to Neptune, they have to figure out whether Neptune goes around the sun or the earth? No. It's been settled for a long time that Neptune goes around the sun. We don't have to re-establish this each time we shoot stuff into space. No need to reinvent the wheel. Science builds on what it already knows.