The punctuated equilibrium pattern and the neo-Darwinian continuous, random mutation pattern contradict each other. So, you can't be rational and have both. The data, however, supports punctuated equilibrium.
That's a view I have not heard before. I suspect the paleontologists would say that the molecular biologists are the ones who should step aside.
Although I think that neo-Darwinism has been falsified, that is not enough. We need a paradigm shift as well. The old neo-Darwinian paradigm is reductionist, that is, it attempts to reduce everything to the level of the genes within a single cell of an organism. That is too restrictive. The focus should be switched back to the group of organisms or the species level. Then more than sexual reproduction can be part of evolutionary theory.

