[tallhappy]

Remember the human-chimp-gorilla ERVs?

Yes. or the Precambrian rabbit?

No.

To advance to the level of theory, it has to account for all the evidence that the ToE does, and then some.

ToE can account for any and all evidence.

There's no evidence possible it can't account for.

The erv is a perfect example. There are erv-like inserts that aren't shared by all commonly descendent organisms. Does it then overturn evolution? No. The idea is some insertions came afterward, or were deleted etc...

Whatever is seen is ispo facto the trace of evolution.

[Dimensio]

ToE can account for any and all evidence.

This is not accurate. The theory of evolution would be unable to explain the existence of Precambrian rabbit fossils. It would also be unable to explain ERV sequences shared by humans and gorillas, but not chimpanzees.

[RightWingNilla]

There are erv-like inserts that aren't shared by all commonly descendent organisms.

Once again we are reminded that tallhappy has very little actual understanding of basic genetics and his postings are just so much bluster.

The genomes of the great apes in these studes contain something like 3 billion base pairs spread over 22 chromosomes. The ERVs discussed here for example, that *are* shared between closely related organisms are not simply present in these species, but they are found at the *precisely the same locus*.

What are the odds that in each of these examples, these events all occurred independently?