Like I said - make up your minds which side you want to argue. And what facts do you have that it is all random, since we also know that virus develop specific strategies for insertion to specific genomes? Are you arguing against the virologists now? Do evolutionists suddenly know more than they?
And it isn't random insertion - it is from being moved where needed at any given time - being they are used by the genome for protien production.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirus
"ERVs are a subclass of a type of gene called a transposon, which can be packaged and moved within the genome to serve a vital role in gene expression and in regulation."
And not all you think are ERV's may really be from insertion:
"Researchers have suggested that retroviruses evolved from a type of transposable gene called a retrotransposon, which includes ERVs; these genes can mutate and instead of moving to another location in the genome they can become exogenous or pathogenic. This means that not all ERVs may have originated as an insertion by a retrovirus but that some may have been the source for the genetic information in the retroviruses they resemble."
Just face the facts and admit there is not enough knowledge right now to be making any claims at all when it comes to ERV's.