from a site discussing ERVs (Seems these supposed ‘evidences for common descent are made up of ‘Human Specific’ and Chimp Specific’ which just shows that even macroevo advocates can’t agree that they are ‘commonly shared’ but Talk Origin has made that claim anyways- apparently, makign hte claim makes it so DESPITE the evidence against it?:
“Endogenous retroviruses. Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) have become all but extinct in the human lineage, with only a single retrovirus (human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K)) still active24. HERV-K was found to be active in both lineages, with at least 73 human-specific insertions (7 full length and 66 solo long terminal repeats (LTRs)) and at least 45 chimpanzee-specific insertions (1 full length and 44 solo LTRs). A few other ERV classes persisted in the human genome beyond the human–chimpanzee split, leaving 9 human-specific insertions (all solo LTRs, including five HERV9 elements) before dying out.”
(Initial Sequence of the Chimpanzee Genome, Nature Sept 1 2005)
If this is something chimps and humans have in common then why are they spoken of as human and chimpanzee specific. These are known to be the most highly transposable elements in the respective genomes, at what point are the sequences identical because I haven’t found any and I have been looking for months.
“Against this background, it was surprising to find that the chimpanzee genome has two active retroviral elements (PtERV1 and PtERV2) that are unlike any older elements in either genome; these must have been introduced by infection of the chimpanzee germ line. The smaller family (PtERV2) has only a few dozen copies, which nonetheless represent multiple (5–8) invasions, because the sequence differences among reconstructed subfamilies are too great (8%) to have arisen by mutation since divergence from human. It is closely related to a baboon endogenous retrovirus (BaEV, 88% ORF2 product identity) and a feline endogenous virus (ECE-1, 86% ORF2 product identity). The larger family (PtERV1) is more homogeneous and has over 200 copies. Whereas older ERVs, like HERV-K, are primarily represented by solo LTRs resulting from LTR–LTR recombination, more than half of the PtERV1 copies are still full length, probably reflecting the young age of the elements. PtERV1-like elements are present in the rhesus monkey, olive baboon and African great apes but not in human, orang-utan or gibbon, suggesting separate germline invasions in these species.”
PtERV1 and PtERV2 supposedly happened after the human/chimpanzee split, they give reasons for this. However, the PtERV1 ERV is present in the rhesus monkey, olive baboon and African great apes but not in humans! What is up with that?
I have had evolutionists rant and rave about ERVs but when they are confronted with the actual scientific data they are ready to change the subject. What they will tell you is that this represents some kind of a twin nested hiearchy, which is absurd, you wouldn’t use highly transposable elements for something like that. You would use mitochondria dna (mtDNA) which is also refered to as a molecular clock. The molecular clocks are notoriously inaccurate and do not line up with what their paloeontologist brethren are saying. Molecular clocks can be as far out as 10-12 million years for the chimpanzee human split and that varies by a great deal as well.
ERVs are not proof of anything, if you notice there is very little scientific literature even being produced. That is because no one knew they were there until fairly recently and no one quite knows what to make of them, especially evolutionists.”
Tell that to Allmendream, he’s the one who is still clinging to the Temple of Darwin’s long since refuted ERV arguments. And let’s not give him to much info. to start with. For some reason he wants us to educate him on his own ERV arguments before he will respond to ours. Talk about being overly careful!