You can hear the bloop, and see a spectrogram of it, here:
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/vents/acoustics/sounds/bloop.html

Interesting isn't it. Once a species has evolved to the point where it can comprehend the processes that gave rise to it they've already moved beyond them.

The answer to your question is simply this: They (we) won't have to handle that. These attempts at creating "life in a test-tube" will fail just as all other attempts have failed.

Your desire to continue to assert that "we evolved via the straight Darwinian shtick." without having any evidence of phase-changes in any of the prevailing modes of evolution, with the notable exception of micro-evolution perhaps, points not to the "creation scientists" or young-earth creationists inability or unwillingness to recognize that anything's happening, but to your own inability to admit that after almost 200 years of "phase-changes" there is still no trustworthy evidence that Darwinian evolution is anything other than a hypothesis.

*sigh*

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-mustread.html

And in particular, "29+ Evidences for Macroevolution":

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And "Observed Instances of Speciation":

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

*double sigh*

Sam your references make my case for me to some degree. I'll highlight only the first and most obvious since this debate has raged for many many years and it's doubtful either of us will be changing their minds anytime soon :)

In my reading of "29+ Evidences for Macroevolution" I read that Dr. Theobald states that Macroevolution is evidenced by the fact that all life on earth uses the same generic mechanisms, in this case RNA and DNA (Yes this is a simplistic reading but hey I'm a simple guy). In the blog entry Mr Stross uses the two experiments to make NON-DNA/RNA based life (if successful obviously) as "phase-changes" of evolution. Which is it? Does macroevolution predict and require that all life will/must use DNA/RNA or doesn't it?