Girl from Australia,
To answer your questions,
Read [URL=http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF003.html]]]This[/URL]
and if you have time, there is a wealth of information [URL=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/information/infotheory.html]]]Here[/URL]

It's so easy to learn if you're willing. [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirus]]]Here's a good place to start[/URL]

Where you got 8,000 years, I will never know.

Yamil,
My question was written by me. The fact that it is a popular question (as it should be) has no bearing on the facts that:
(1) You have shown everyone that you are intellectually dishonest
(2) You have plagarized someone else's work
(3) You are avoiding the question with semantics and arrogance

You and I sir, have nothing left to talk about.

However, for anybody that wishes to see solid proof of the theory of evolution, ask yourself this question:

Please explain how humans and other primates can have the exact same endogenous retroviral inserts in the exact same part of their genome, without there being a common ancestry.

Your entire post was basically,
"I'm going to ignore your question and explain how this thingy is really complex so I don't understand how it could happen".

All you have done is merely acknowledge that they do indeed exist, but I'm still not convinced that you actually know what they are.

So tell me, Mr cut-and-paste argument:
Please explain how humans and other primates can have the exact same endogenous retroviral inserts in the exact same part of their genome, without there being a common ancestry.

Hint: You may wish to find out what an endogenous retrovirus is.

So thus far, you have forgotten to answer the question, copy-and-pasted an answer that you thought would work without citing a source, and then arrogantly exclaimed "Ha!" at the end of the plagarized post. Just so you know.

Your bridge analogy was laughable. You just used the scientific method to demonstrate that some bridges will fail after a certain number of attempts. Congratulations.

And naming fallacies, while making you look smug, doesn't help your argument since everybody is ignoring SOLID EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION. The challenge at hand is:

Please explain how humans and other primates can have the exact same endogenous retroviral inserts in the exact same part of their genome, without there being a common ancestry.

And of course Gerard's addition:
why do other endogenous retrovirusses consistently appear in analogous parts of the genomes of other creatures. Always close together in vertical groupings in a particular branch of the phylogenic tree, instead of all over the place?

As to your last post:
You are avoiding the question. And your counter shows (very evidently) that you know nothing of endogenous retroviruses or the theory of evolution.
Here's another hint:
Endogenous retroviruses have nothing to do with genetic similarity in the sense of which you are speaking. It has a lot more to do with primates catching colds several thousand years ago.

[URL=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/images/hominids2.jpg]]]Take a look at this picture[/URL]. That is a great collection of fossils.
Of the intermediate and transitional forms, scientists also have:
Reptile-birds
Reptile-mammals
Legged whales
Legged seacows, etc. (see link below)

Faced with this kind of evidence, you cannot say that science does not have transitional forms or a great fossil record.

If you are interested in learning more, please [URL=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html]]]Take a look at this web page[/URL]

""Here's a good start..."
Now hold on horsey, you are already trying to go from subject to subject without answering anything."
Show me an intelligible argument and I will answer it. You have yet to do so with regards to evolution, so I thought I would show you 100 million year old FOSSIL, which completely contradicts your belief system. It was fun for me, what can I say? Oh, and way to avoid hard evidence for evolution and a transitional fossil at that. Can't face the facts and don't know anything, so you bring the argument back to...a non-argument. Well done

"You are going to have to do better than that if you are going to strut over here claiming to be smarter than everyone else simply because you affirm that your great grandad was a flee-infested monkey."
Strawman. And arrogant at that.

As for observing something that takes millions of years- That's hilarious.

Also, name one lie that evolutionary biologists currently state with regards to the theory of evolution. Do you think that endogenous retroviral inserts are a "lie" or a fact, for example? Here's a hint:
[URL=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#retroviruses]Here's a hint[/URL]

Discerning Believer,
We did not evolve from monkeys, and the theory of evolution does not say that.

Kyle Smith,
Thank you for an intelligent, well thought-out post. I do not, however, presuppose evolution and "deep time" as you state. I used to presuppose a young earth just like you, and did not "believe" that evolution could be true. I quoted "believe" to distinguish the difference between belief and knowledge, or faith and facts as it were.
The truth is that evolution is a theory, and it is also a fact. (See definition for scientific theory and do a ton of research on evolution if you have any questions about this).

As logical beings, you and I must take the evidence we are given and discern between reality and beliefs. I did my research, and it turns out that every single young-earth creationist counter-claim to the theory of evolution either patently misrepresents evolution, is simply a lie, is incorrect on many levels, or all of the above. To demonstrate this, take any claim that Kent Hovind (for example) makes with regards to evolution and then research it on www.talkorigins.org There are many great examples there.