Endogenous Retroviruses are not evidence for evolution, as shown by Daniel Nahum

PLEASE NOTE: my opponent has forefeited the previous round- ALL of my points still stand unchallenged! My opponent did not offer a single line of his own reasoning, instead his entire argument is a copypasta- http://swordandshield.biz... My opponent did not provide a SINGLE source, although he mentioned in the title that some guy named Daniel Nahum has somehow shown that ERVs are not evidence... I went through the ENTIRE argument, showed the blatant inconsistencies and provided reliable sources to support my position! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now let's look at some of the other failed arguments which are proposed by my opponent! PROPOSITION 1: "evolutionists fail to provide a rate in which and ERV can change, and they fail to provide a mechanism in which and ERV can change so drastically and pass it to the next generation, but there is not evidence supporting this claim." REBUTTAL: This is COMPLETE nonsense! ERVs- Endogenous Retroviruses are not something which resides in the genome, but their genetic code is left the genome! The rate of change of DNA in the human genome is 3x10^-6 per base per 20 years (1), multiply the mutation rate times the total number of base pairs in a human (~3 billion) and you'll get approximately 9000 base pair mutations per 20 year generation, or 450 mutations per year! If the mutations never occur in the same place and are all retained, then the ENTIRE human genome can be replaced in 6.6 million years JUST BY [RANDOM] MUTATIONS! "More generally, the mutation rate in eukaryotes is in generally 10-4 to 10-6 mutations per base pair per generation[4], and for bacteria the rate is around 10-8 per base pair per generation[5]. The highest mutation rates are found in viruses, which can have either RNA or DNA genomes. DNA viruses have mutation rates between 10-6 to 10-8 mutations per base per generation, and RNA viruses have mutation rates between 10-3 to 10-5 per base per generation[5]. Human mitochondrial DNA has been estimated to have mutation rates of ~3ï¿½10-6 or ~2.7ï¿½10-5 per base per 20 year generation (depending on the method of estimation)[6]; these rates are considered to be significantly higher than rates of human genomic mutation at ~2.5ï¿½10-8 per base per generation[1]."(1) PROPOSITION 2: "This argument also assumes evolution to be true, so which one is it? a) ERVs prove evolution b) Evolution proves ERV" REBUTTAL: This is my favorite statement, so I had to discuss it again! Here is how it works: Newton observed that objects with mass attract one another so he proposed a theory to explain what was observed (1). --> Falling objects prove the theory of gravity; --> The theory of gravity cannot prove that objects are falling- it can only explain WHY they're falling! So we observe Endogenous Retroviruses transcribe RNA into the genome of a host, we see ERV RNA left in the matching locations in multiple separate genomes, and we explain it with the theory of evolution! PROPOSITION 3: "How do they know that ERVs came from retroviruses?" REBUTTAL: Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) **ARE** retroviruses!!! It's like saying- "how do you know shipwrecks come from ships?" Well we could all say that the same people that designed ships also designed shipwrecks and put them in the bottom of the ocean for no apparent reason! PROPOSITION 3: "The only thing that we really know is that ERVs and retroviruses are similar (almost identical) but this does not mean that ERVs came originally form retroviral infections, maybe it is the other way around, maybe retroviruses came originally form ERVs after all retroviruses can not live without a host genome, which means that the first generation of retroviruses came from inside the genome, once you accept this as a fact or at least as a reasonable possibility, it is logical to assume that retroviruses came from retroviral DNA." REBUTTAL: FAILURE, EPIC FAILURE! None of this makes sense... the propositions is that retroviruses came from Endogenous retroviruses, because retroviruses "cannot live outside the host genome"- actually retroviruses DO live outside the genome, but they can't REPRODUCE outside the genome. Scientists have studied retroviruses for more than 20 years, and the most famous retrovirus is HIV (3)... so my opponent thinks that HIV viruses cannot live unless they're in a genome, which is patently FALSE- HIV lays dormant in the host until it encounters DNA after which it transcribes its RNA into the genome and thus it reproduces! So by my opponent's reference to flawed logic, he must find it perfectly plausible that ships come from shipwrecks! EPIC FAIL! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conclusion: Not only has my opponent forfeited this debate, but his original post contained laughable "logic"... It's utterly inconceivable that anybody who has BASIC understanding of how retroviruses work, would even postulate the nonsense that my opponent has proposed! Obviously my opponent's ONLY source of knowledge on ERVs is a single paper from an unnamed author (although my opponent said that this came from Daniel Nahum, the paper did not have Daniel's name on it)! ERVs are DEFINITIVE evidence FOR evolution, the evidence leaves us with no other conclusion! Please vote CON! (1) http://en.wikipedia.org... (2) http://en.wikipedia.org... (3) http://en.wikipedia.org...