It's not pretending. That's why I explained to you the predictions many days before you made these objections. And why I explained to you MONTHS ago - common ancestry makes no claims over the particular functions of the genome. It makes predictions based on the patterns of inheritance. Which is WHY ERV orthology, not specific function or lack thereof, demonstrates evolution.<quoted text>The proposal that a random segment of genetic code could be inserted and result in functionality is absurd. It was assumed by all evolutionary biologists in the 1970's that ALL ERVs were nonfunctional... Until they were proven wrong. Now you're pretending that evolution predicts functional ERVs.
6 months later and you still repeat the same arguments without dealing with ours.