There are a number of papers in the literature that investigate the rate of emergence of complex adaptations, based on factors like, e.g., population size and the number of mutations the complex adaptation would require.
And they use that to question the plausibility of evolution?
If we accept your argument, then any adaptation is plausible
Actually, I was saying that "star calcium atoms to body calcium atoms" is
not plausible. The point was that plausibility didn't really matter.
By that argument, it is perfectly reasonable to suppose that ERVs in specific genomic locations in humans and other primates share those same locations because of chance alone.
That is a possibility, but we have evidence suggesting that they're related.
You sure you want to go down that route?
No, it doesn't have anything to do with the topic.