1.6% of the North American population says, If universal common ancestry is true, then all organisms will have one or more traits in common.
This is simply not the case. While it’s true that organisms MIGHT have one or more traits in common, on the theory of evolution there is no logical reason why completely novel organisms could not arise in one or more lineages. In the absence of specification for a mechanism of descent, there is no way to tie the traits of the descendants to those of the common ancestor.
While “common traits” which we see in nature does fit with the theory of a common Creator, common traits are not necessary for the theory of universal common ancestry.
“The belief that evolution predicts biologic universals is one of evolution’s major illusions.” (ReMine, 92.)
On evolution, after life’s origin, nothing prevents life from branching and leading separate lineages that are entirely lacking the known biologic universals. If evolution is true, then distant ancestors and descendants can be totally different. While evolution can accommodate biological universals it never did predict them.
It is only because we see common traits that 1.6% of the population insist that common traits would be predicted by the theory of common ancestry.
Even though these people say that without observation and verification nothing can be believed, and even though common ancestry is not a predictor for the common traits that we see, these people will believe with a deep and fervent faith in common ancestry to their dying day.
That’s just that way these people are. It’s how they think.