So what you are saying is that you object to any speculations about an area of science, without full disclosure of all the things the scientist does not know.
Why are you trying so hard to put scientists in a box … over Eukaryotic cells of all things?
Joshua intentionally focuses on primate evolution, the great apes, and finally humans.
You seem to want to cultivate “gotcha” points by going in the other direction.
I understand.
If universal common descent by known evolutionary mechanisms is challenged that does not rule out limited common descent of species.
Joshuas argument also does not require absolute truth of evolutionary human origins it just is comparable with the current hypothesis.
Yet in the same paper you have this statement.
The eukaryotic lineage arose from bacterial and archaeal cells that underwent a symbiotic merger. At the origin of the eukaryote lineage, the bacterial partner contributed genes, metabolic energy, and the building blocks of the endomembrane system.
One of the more aggravating advantages of @swamidass’ scenarios is that there is plenty of room for people to personalize the scenario … providing plenty of aggro for people who couldn’t imagine anything like Scenario Alt-01 or Scenario Alt-99 every occurring.
But it does raise the singular question:
If Accepting evolutionary principles under God’s total rulership solves a great many problems, which are then tossed into the trash by some Creationists who just can’t get around the word “Evolution”!