Yes.

Frank:"If a higher power is involved in the Genesis of those useful lengths of DNA, it is invisible to us even as it happens. So where does that leave you? Intelligent input isn't ruled out, but since the useful genes occur in the donor organisms at the frequency expected from known mutation rates there is no reason to include it as a viable force either."

I don't believe that you or anyone else knows what "frequency" of mutation, or what kinds of mutation gave us the transition between T. rex cousins and modern day chicken gumbo. As has been noted, there are "jumps" in the biosphere occupants that may not be having any great reliance on conventional "natural" gene drift.

It also occurred to me, while at the veterinarian getting "my" shots updated and claws trimmed (heheh) that the observable unity in all life forms as much suggests a common designer, not exclusively a single point of presumed origin, the "first" animal. Why could not life start naturally/spontaneouslly in multiple slimy tide pools and then go from there with their unique features? What behooves all animal life to have similar DNA, IF the DNA is indeed basically similar?

Frank quotes:"DWA: Frank has suggested that the life designs around us on Earth are all off the same basic modelling shelf, wants to think there is one point of origin ??, as if that would rule out punctuated artistic modification of selected lucky life models. I do not concur that this is "evidence" ruling out an "intelligent designer" in the synthetic woodwork."

Frank:"As usual, you misrepresent my position.

Thank you for your tolerant benevolence, while I try to tease the solid meat out of your tyrannosaurus jaws.

Frank:"I guess it is too subtle for you. There is indeed nothing to rule out any possible intelligent design, but there is no evidence that it does exist either and as long as known natural processes can account for what is seen, there is no reason to consider it as a likely cause. "

So, as I said recently before, stalemate. You can't prove or disprove either ID or "Darwinism". The evidence of ID will depend on how sophisticated the intelligent designer is at distractions and camouflage, and whether anyone is really able to perceive it in the biosphere. "This" complex, marvelous, ?improbable biosphere here around us may be itself a most eloquent message of "intelligent design". For me, it is. Hm?

Spontaneous intelligent human and animal behavior at levels of such complexity is just impressive for me to witness.

Maybe there is just a "natural" law favoring "intelligence", even sophistication, while allowing some artistic deviations?