I think you've made a valid point here. It is however, a point that has
been made several times in the past, see generally Waddington, push-pull
evolution and the Bohemian, yet often relevant reviews of the literature
by Arthur Koestler in his book, The Ghost in the Machine.
I am struck by the issue of what the driver is behind evolution.
That is, what drives variation sufficiently to propel selection into
being a creative process.
This is the issue that Darwin never solved in his lifetime and was
thought to have been solved by the rediscovery of Mendel by Tschermak,
Correns and DeVries.
Random mutation and reassortment don't appear to be adequate to me to
explain all observable molecular genetics. And I think that this issue
rather than clock, should be consuming our interest.
Your thoughts are welcome,
Temple and Jefferson