What would be the difference between this and say, models of common descent? Maybe the reason a lot of vertabrates look like they were built from some kind of modified template is because all vertabrates share a common ancestor?
Once he introduces god into the picture it is fruitful to address the archetype issue theologically. Would the god he believes in create so sub-optimally? Doesn't make sense to me. If you have infinite resources and time has no meaning, then it's trivial to create the best animal for any given niche. It just doesn't make sense for god to work like a lazy engineer.
The problem this guy is going to have is proving that his archetypes are fundamentally different. If it can be argued that even his archetypes show evidence of common descent - or in his case, modification of some meta-archetype - then his model doesn't really explain anything.
[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 05-05-2003]