Joined: Sep. 2007
Seems there are a couple of discussion disjuncts here. First, the "fossil record" is NOT created by RM+NS. It's the consequence of chance preservation, chance revelation of the strata and location of the fossil, and perhaps somewhat guided discovery. However, when George says the fossil record results from RM/ NS, I understand him to be using shorthand for the fact that the fossilized thing is proof of a living thing that was, itself, wholly the product of RM/NS.
Second, to say there are highly conserved genes, says absolutely nothing about mutation rates or causes. That bit of ionizing radiation nerull mentions is as likely to zap a highly conserved region of an individual cell's genome as it is any other region of that genome. Highly conserved means when that cell divides -- or, if its a germ cell, when it combines with another -- the result is unlikely to be viable -- even if the change is relatively minor.
So, I'm sorry, but you sitll don't have a pot to piss in.