The 'tree-like' pattern has no organisms at the branches.
Can't you see that? It's a mental construct.
Just because there may be more than one insertion event in a preferred site doesn't make it simpler to have a single event followed by an impossible string of future events.
That's foolishness.
OK, so what?
Can't you see that? It's a mental construct.
You find the homologous ERVs and the data organizes itself as a tree. Do you have a problem with this?
So either the ERVs are inheritance from common ancestors, or they were inserted independently. In the latter case, the insertion points exhibit the tree pattern.
Just because there may be more than one insertion event in a preferred site doesn't make it simpler to have a single event followed by an impossible string of future events.
You need to show that your scenario is more likely. That would involve lab tests of how much freedom there is in retroviral insertion into germ cells, and calculations showing that every one of these ERVs fixing in all the species involved (remember that's the phenomenon that need explaining - a tree-like structure doesn't have gaps in it - if the ERV is in both orangutan and gorilla genomes, it will also be in both people and chimps) is more likely than one fixation event followed by speciation.
That's foolishness.
Needs to be demonstrated. Perhaps DI or AiG or one of the other anti-evolution advocacy groups could sponsor some research for a change.