I suspect you aren't reading well. I said: > ...they are making huge numbers of identical copies with very rare (and usually non-functional) variations... to

I suspect you aren't reading well. I said: > ...they are making huge numbers of identical copies with very rare (and usually non-functional) variations... to which you replied: > You're ignoring unsuccessful mutations... You are also conflating absolute numbers with likelihoods; flipping two dozen heads in a row is a rare occurrence (1:2⁻²⁴). Saying that "if everyone on Earth tried it today we'd expect it to happen ~500 times" is not a counter argument. You're also conflating the substitution rate (rate of mutation rate accumulation in the viral gene pool) with the frequency of copying errors (your "chaos monkeys" metaphor, to which I'm objecting). Your objection to my statement that viral reproduction consumes resources from the host (which I shorthanded as "energy" since all cellular resources ultimately depend on this) is nonsensical. Who cares about the mass of the viruses? That's like disputing the claim that "the vandals caused $3 million in property damage" by saying "but they only had $273.15 with them". It's completely irrelevant.