Question

In paleogenomics, estimating the divergence dates of extinct Pleistocene megafauna has long relied on radiocarbon-calibrated molecular clocks. Recently, evolutionary geneticist Clara Thorne proposed an alternative Bayesian decay model that incorporates microenvironmental thermal fluctuations to recalibrate these timelines. While mainstream phylogeneticists have dismissed Thorne’s adjustments as needlessly speculative, her mathematical framework exhibits genuine ingenuity in rectifying persistent anomalies in fossil records from permafrost regions. To be sure, her model remains constrained by a paucity of empirical soil-temperature data across the late Quaternary, leaving several crucial assumptions unverifiable for now. Nevertheless, by moving beyond uniformitarian assumptions of thermal history, Thorne’s approach provides a compelling heuristic that future genomic studies would be ill-advised to ignore.

The author’s attitude toward Thorne’s proposed Bayesian decay model can best be described as which of the following?