Taz, I have always felt that the difference of replication and metabolism to be a false one even if protocol useful. Stu Kaufmann told me of the inspiration for some of his work was one up man-ship with Dyson and so again a Xerox is not a carbon copy yet the procedure could actually work yet it would take likely more than a lecture on physiological/transmission genetics to show this working in any way for everyone. I may be correct becasue the code can be better conscripted via Newton's laws with Maxwell "evolution: rather than the current expression of molecular diverification slotted biometrically.
The problem here is that in aruging the C side of E one can not even permit one faux pau to be part of the sentence lest sin also be thatsame part which makes commuincatioon in C/E mode neigh impossible. If this was the result then why try to start with unless only negative social consequences are desired??
There is DNA replication but diploid-haploids are not the same, not even by a sembelnce I should think. You did say that you may disagree with Dawkins generally and on this we may find the neutral evolution to not decieve each other with even without a seperated NOMA-NOva.