DWA: Not when they automatically presume that there was no possible intelligence "out there" that could tinker with life seeded onto the Earth. That's just a convenient simplifying shortcut, IMO.

Well, how would you put such speculation into the thought process displayed in the paper? If there were such intelligence possibly involved, how would you test for it, or would you just put a line at the end of every paper saying that unseen, unmeasurable forces could also have been responsible for what was observed? That would cover intelligent agents operating sixty-five million years ago and would also account for pink pixies mixing up the lab samples overnight when nobody was looking.

DWA: "They" could introduce various series/models, and observe them. Certain ones might be designed for some "evolution", that is, adaptations to differing environments, with useful tricks hidden in the inactive majority of the DNA code?

Well, with what you know about DNA, how could you test for such sequences and how could you tell which came from outside designers and which came from DNA doing what DNA is known to be able to do (unless those pink pixies are doing that too)?

DWA: Did you ever hear that urban myth of a counterfeit 1957 Chevrolet factory? (A Chrysler plant?) You know, with a popular model, and junkyards filled with good parts, it is certainly possible that all "1957" Chevrolets were NOT originally manufactured in 1956-1957.

I hadn't heard that, but even if it were true, do you think that those counterfeits would escape detection by people who actually know something about '57 Chevys?

DWA: Right now, there are electronic counterfeit products that are even engineered/designed from the ground up. Just make something that would sell, and slap a popular label on it.

Do you confidently wear a Rolex, secure in the knowledge that nobody could ever tell whether or not you paid ten bucks for it?

DWA: Rip-off copies of books, music, and video are widespread and common, too, right now, and for many decades, at least.