There is no reason for all primates to have the same disabling mutation of the GULO gene other than the same mutation in a common ancestor. Why would all primates be designed with a non functioning GULO gene in the first place? And if the non-functionality of the GULO gene in primates occurred after the fall of mankind, why then did the same disabling mutation occur in all primates independently?
Showing that some EVOLUTIONARILY conserved ERV sequences have function is not the same as showing that all ERV sequences have function.
Once again Creationists have whiffed the ball on the link between function and evolutionary conservation between species.
In order to break that link they need to do actual research, actual science; but creation “scientists” don't actually do any of their own science; as such they are completely dependent upon REAL scientists for any and all relevant data.
==Once again you have no answer other than a cut and paste from ignorant sources.
That’s not a cut and paste. I merely posted a link to a paper written by creation scientists who present evidence that the so-called GULO pseudogene is not evidence of common descent. Did you read it?
==There is no reason for all primates to have the same disabling mutation of the GULO gene other than the same mutation in a common ancestor.
You are assuming common descent. There is no reason for creation scientists to assume this. Furthermore, you are interpreting ERVs as evidence of ancient exogenous infections, which is another unwarrented Evo assumption. It is much more likely that ERVs were incorporated into the genome at the time of creation, and were designed to pick up the elements necessary to leave the genome and facilitate horizontal gene transfer. If this is indeed the case, then from a creation “modular design” perspective, the closer the body plan and functional needs are, the more we should expect to see “conserved” ERV sequences between the same. However, as mentioned before, creation also explains the functionality of the unconserved regions, which makes the design argument far more powerful than neo-Darwinian evolution.
And whether we are talking about pseudogenes or ERVs, both are increasingly thought of as functional precisely because the entire genome is rapidly being discovered to be functional. Just as Creation and ID scientists have been predicting for years.