Only if you take for granted that evolution is a thing

It is not taken for granted as there are several fields that can prove the relationships.

Staring at chicken entrails and tea leaves can look like other things too

Yes this is mysticism, inferring relationships that don't exist, it is a cornerstone of spiritualism and early religion.

On the other hand, if there is a Creator, wouldn't it stand to reason that things might be similarly designed

You are taking for granted that a relationship exists for intelligent design but you can't show me where that is, just that it ios convenient and makes sense.

Having a common ancestor does not indicate cross-species evolution

It is not cross-species evolution. The closest living relative of the dodo is the Nicobar pigeon (dodo-bird-evolution.weebly.com), they both have a commonality in ancestry if you go back enough.

The fact that Great Danes and shi-tzus are both dogs does not show that dogs somehow sprouted from dinosaurs.

Don't be facetious.

It does show they both sprouted from wolves (lh3.googleusercontent.com), its most recent common ancestor. Just as canis lepophagus was the ancestor of coyotes and wolves. You can go further back than this to even show common ancestory between the family Canidae and Ursidae, two completely different animals.

This isn't a realization , this is merely speculation and assumption. (theory)

A theory doesn't mean best guess.

by the microevolution argument you've presented

It was hughely dumbed downv (one purely based on observation), but essentially if you can conceive micro-evolution taking place then macroevolution is exactly that but over a really long time period.

Also, if the idea of monkey to man were true, we wouldn't see primates today

We didn't evolve from monkeys. Homo sapiens sapiens (a primate) share a common ancestor with other primates. There is evidence in the fossil record.

It would've been mimicked throughout the entire animal kingdom to the point where they would've phased themselves out of the primate state.

Evolution has happened through the entire animal kingdom, take a look at what ancient aquatic life forms used to look like, even more recently all Bovines, they are direct ancestors of the Auroch. There is a project to bring back the Auroch so we can further selective breed cattle for better meat, dairy or as a keystone species to fallow unused farmland back into forest to increase natural biodiversity.

Then there are other animals that haven't changed due to having a strong evolutionary strategy and niche in the eco-system like horseshoe crabs and nautilus for example.

Lesser primates didn't phase themselves out of existence because they had the evolutionary advantage at the time of divergence. Their evolutionary strategy was strong. However, our ancestors got kicked out of their arboreal home and were forced to inhabit a terrestrial domain and change their diet, which coincidentally greatly benefited us in the long term.

Maybe it's masochism, I continue to post with that grub avatar next to my name as well.

Here have another

"blind faith" is the purposeful disillusion that ignoring facts that disagree with ones bias prevents those facts from existence (cancel culture is built upon this idea) exists in the leftist echo chambers more so than others.

Case in point is complete disregard for the properties within intelligent design and how they are seen both on a molecular level as well as the expansive universe (in galaxies) around us.

It's perplexing how much studying one can do and yet remain so snarkily ignorant.