Read just the first section about retroviruses and let us know if you refute the information provided. It is the first section and is very short - should only take a couple of minutes to read.
I have asked others that just close their eyes to the information to read just that section and get back to us. So far no one has done it.
Creationists continuing complain that "there is no evidence for evolution" yet when it is provided, it is just ignored.
I have. For once we will be talking about something other than football, and for once it looks like we will disagree.
Perhaps we can agree to disagree
/cliche
Without observing in history how and when ERV's have been introduced, how do we know they are not simply part of the plans of an intelligent designer, in the works and present from the beginning? IMO the conclusion of common ancestry is not totally unreasonable, but it is premature without a longer period of direct observation. I find it interesting that arguments from probablility are allowed when it comes to the location of ERV's as passed down through generations, but they are, in the opinion of some evolutionists, invalid for arguing self-organization as a result of intelligent design (or lack thereof). The dreaded "argument from retro astonishment," as it were.
I admit on the face of it that I understand the biblical texts to be true expositions of how the world and mankind came to be. That is my working assumption; the glasses through which I view whatever other texts and evidence may present themselves to me. May I ask if you have such a guiding set of assumptions, or do you make them up as you go along, or do you work with absolutely no set of assumptions?
Not much different than unbelievers ignoring the evidence for God, is it.