At any rate: similar characteristics in different animals, by themselves, don't necessarily support evolution. BUT. . . biologists use them together with other lines of evidence (DNA similarities and differences, embryology, biogeography, fossils, experiments on artificial and natural selection, etc. etc.)

That being said: Any healthy field of science is constantly being revised and updated as new facts come in and old facts get reinterpreted. (A fair chunk of what I learned in my freshman biology class, back in 1987, was either wrong or incomplete.) That's just the name of the game: good science is always open to revision. We only "believe" in theories until something better comes along -- if anyone comes up with something that explains the facts better than evolution does, or finds something that evolutionary theory genuinely cannot account for, I'll drop evolution like a hot potato. Religious faith -- at least in traditional Christianity, Judaism, and Islam -- is not subject to change. If it was, there would be rewritten versions of the Bible coming out every year, with new chapters added and old ones dropped. And traditional Christian creationism is a religious faith -- because it all depends on one particular interpretation of the first book of the Bible. The strict creationists all tell me that theirs is the only right way to interpret it, with no room for change. That's out of bounds for science right there.

Another nagging question is: how do you disprove the idea of a Creator? I sometimes tell people that the world was created yesterday morning at 9:28 AM, and the Creator gave us all false memories, and planted false newspapers and books in our libraries, etc. so that we'd think that we existed before 9:28 AM. How could you ever disprove that? You can't -- which is why it's not science.

But there's one reason to think that physical human evolution won't go much further: Evolution happens the fastest in small, isolated populations. If a small group of humans were somehow completely isolated from the rest of humanity for, say, 100,000 years, they might evolve into a new species. But because of human migrations, explorations, and especially modern transportation and mobility, it is very unlikely that any group of humans has ever been, or will ever be, isolated for that long. Humanity is close to becoming one enormous population -- and evolution happens extremely slowly in large populations. Humans can also avoid natural selection in many cases, thanks to our complex culture. (Instead of having to evolve huge teeth to crack nuts, we just make nutcrackers. . .)

So my best prediction is that we won't physically change much over the next million or so years. Of course, if human genetic engineering takes off, all predictions could end up going right out the window. . .