no way to answer such a question without real experimental research, and not even sure what you mean by "see", we dont "see" most virus mutations because most m

no way to answer such a question without real experimental research, and not even sure what you mean by "see", we dont "see" most virus mutations because most mutations don't survive... and certainly aren't sequenced. And the point isn't that a virus mutates on every replication, but that every replication is a chance for a mutation. The point is everything here hinges on an argument from probability. There are more viruses on earth than there are stars in the universe, the astronomical figures are meet with each other. We're not talking different orders of magnitude between the opportunities for a certain mutation and the probability of a certain mutation occuring.. edit: Further, it looks like the sequence exists in some bacteria, meaning it isn't even a question of a random mutation but possibily the incorporation of the sequence from an existing source (which the author claims doesn't exist, but it does, in mycobacterium smegmatis...). this destroys the entire premise of the claim.