Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Another Video on ERVs

This one has classical music in the background and really hammers the point home about how improbable it is that humans and chimpanzees just happen to coincidentally share the same ERVs. Entertaining and thought-provoking at the same time. Enjoy.

Althought I cannot tell who made this video, here is where the information came from

C. M. Romano, R. F. Ramalho, and P. M. de A. Zanotto; Tempo and mode of ERV-K evolution in human and chimpanzee genomes. Arch Virol (2006) 151: 22152228


  1. I don't know the name of the guy(?) who made the video but his handle is cdk007 and he has a channel on youtube here.

    Lots of good videos.

  2. Yes they were. I mentioned only this one but he has a bunch of them.

  3. cdk007 is one of the big five or six major players defending evolution on youtube.

    Still, I don't think the strongest evidence is comparing how chimps and humans share them. The strongest is that as we travel back down the phylogenetic tree (ie, next our gorillas, then orangutans, then old world monkeys, then new world monkeys), we find ERVs in orthogonal locations in this same nested hierarchy, the same hierarchy created by completed independent pseudogene evidence. It is either common descent or God faking common descent to fool us.

  4. You are right, Pete. That is why I think that Jeremy Mohn's video on ERVs was so good. It showed that you could predict where the ERVs would be found based on the cladograms. The whole package is another nail in the coffin to the progressive creation crowd.

  5. Yea, I've said it before and I'll say it again, any time I come to a creationist site which attempts to refute evolution I search for the term ERV. If they don't bother to address it I don't bother to read their page.

  6. Pete, Creation Ministries International has a bunch of pages on ERVs. I don't have the molecular background to tackle them but I would love to hear what you have to say.

  7. I went to their page and did the search and came up with three short articles. It seems they all claim that since some ERVs have function (a misleading way to say it btw), then they are not indeed viral insertions. I'll leave it to the biologists who identify why it is known it is a virus, but that doesn't seem to be contraversal among actual biologists. The virus itself comes with many functioning parts, and sometimes you own genome may coopt some of that machinery for its own uses.

    I don't personally recommend the sight, as the author is one of the most vulgar venomous atheists there ever was (albeit, her colorful language is often entertaining and a bit of a naughty pleasure) but over at
    had a post on this creationist claim.
    Here is another page where she answers all the creationist claims on one page.