>Yes, there is sense that people believe that this research is a fundamental
>challenge to current evolutionary/biological thinking:
The quotes you followed this with talk about enhancement and transformation, not fundamental challenge.
>What reason do you have to assume that HGT in
>general, and this paper specifically, is in any way contentious or
>challenging to some reigning orthodoxy in the scientific community?
Nobody said that. People were just excited about something so interesting getting attention outside of specialists. Why such a tizzy about that?