Old earth creationists either rely on outside authorities & eisegesis or run away. They can never show from the Bible that the Earth is old
15
1
20
895
I'm not necessarily an "old world creationist" but I both accept the obviousness of evolution and an old world, and the possibility of a recent creator. The Bible allows for both. The Bible doesn't require that the earth LOOKS like it was created 6000 years ago.
1
35
What do you mean when you say: "obviousness of evolution and an old world"?
1
40
Like how literally every line of evidence converges on the same ~4.5 Billions years for the age of the earth and evolution. Endogenous retroviral insertions alone have no good creationist rebuttal.
3
29
We have books, videos, debates, presentations and published peer reviewed papers on ERVs from the creationists view. More than enough for a skeptic
1
1
39
Give me the crux of your argument. 1. Are you claiming that sequences of LTR-gag-pol-env-LTR are not retroviral insertions?
1
36
In the creation model, many retrovirus-like genomic elements originated as intrinsic, designed components of created organisms, functioning in regulation, development, genomic restructuring, and controlled generation of variation. It’s escape/progressive version of virus origins.
1
60
Non-created/acquired ERVs are primarily the unfixed, polymorphic elements that differ among individuals or populations. These are accepted as genuine later retroviral insertions arising from exogenous viral activity after creation.
1
65
So then your argument is that endogenous retroviral insertions cannot become fixed in the population. And every sequence that evolutionists point to as ancient ERVs (the majority having no function) are actually design features.
1
44
Yes? No? Maybe? We can extend this a bit further then and say that it must be mere coincidence that the map of known shared ERVs in primates aligns almost perfectly with phylogenetic trees based on traits, and the relative dating of the fossil records?
1
43
I'm a little disappointed... @ApoloJedi_ had me expecting to get educated. So far all I've seen is denial of evidence and special pleading. I would like to know how you square your assertion that RV insertions *CAN NOT* fix with the fact that the KoVR is currently fixing.
1
59
...and KoRV is extremely harmful to koalas. So it's very bad for your position that we are observing it happening in real time. On the other hand, you have ~380 viruses in your body right now. The number of viruses that are actually harmful is statistically zero.

Sep 29, 2026 · 12:01 PM UTC

2
58
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
We know empirically that the fixation rate of a neutral allele is 1/2N. So that makes it statistically inevitable that some number of ERVs will fix because the vast majority of RV insertions will not impact reproductive fitness.
1
37
A bit ironic, is it not, that the op complained about people running away from debate?
1
27