Question on Falsification of Common Descent

In the Talk.Origins Archive, there is a page titled
"Browse the Archive" at:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html

This page includes a link titled "Evidence for Evolution"
which points to:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

This page includes multiple evidences under the title
"29+ Evidences for Macroevolution" and subtitled
"The Case for Common Descent."

Just to be clear on the focus of the question I pose
below, I will quote two sections form the Introduction:
First, macroevolution, as used here "entails common
ancestry, descent with modification, speciation, the
genealogical relatedness of all life, transformation of
species, and large scale functional and structural
changes of populations through time, all at or above
the species level."

Second, the theory in question, common descent,
"is a general descriptive theory that concerns the
genetic origins of living organisms (though not the
ultimate origin of life). The theory specifically
postulates that all of the earth's known biota are
genealogically related, much in the same way
that siblings or cousins are related to one another.
Thus, macroevolutionary history and processes
necessarily entail the transformation of one
species into another and, consequently, the
origin of higher taxa."

This page and subtending pages present a multitude
of evidences in the form of predictions and fulfillment.
Each stated prediction is supported by evidence from
the world as it is.

The discussion of each prediction includes a discussion
of potential falsifications of the prediction. Unsurprisingly,
the potential falsifications are all refuted by known data
about the world as it is.

Critiques of the specific evidences have been made and
responded to. For now, let us stipulate that the stated
theory of common descent is supported by the evidence
given.

That leaves just one question (for now).

Given that the world is as it is, what would falsify
the stated theory of common descent?

Dennis Arndt

.