You may be correct. It's difficult to tell the difference between the various ID/creationists without being able to see the numbers on their jerseys.
But since microgood apparently is ignoring my challenge to support his claim that "evolutionists violate all the rules of logic when coming to their conclusions", it does make sense that he would ignore the evidence presented about ERV insertions. This may rise to the level of "frequently repeated error".
You mean like this one.
Secondary source, freeper post. A HERV-K provirus in chimpanzees, bonobos and gorillas, but not humans."
The significance of the work presented here is the demonstration of the utility of HERV-K as a marker for studying human evolution, the conclusion that HERV-K was active at about the time that the three lineages were evolutionarily separating, and the very strong experimental evidence that, in some fraction of the genome, chimpanzees, bonobos, and gorillas are more closely related to each other than any of them is to humans. HERV-K and other retrotransposable elements should contribute to determining what that fraction is.
Full article here(but his may not work)....http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VRT-433PCG6-S&_coverDate=05%2F15%2F2001&_alid=374741385&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_qd=1&_cdi=6243&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=5e49b0326a8026f472bfcb0022b73c67
Several possibilities were considered to explain how a provirus could be present in Gorilla and Pan but be absent in Homo. It is highly unlikely that the provirus was deleted in humans, as the retroviral integration process is irreversible.
It is a good article. In the end, they use Darwinian logic to fit the pieces together, but it grieviously injures the assertion that ERV's are the end-all to assigning absolute relationships.