“But — why doesn’t the concept of exoplanets, dwarves and other debris drifting out beyond orbits of gas giants (eventually out of range of being vacuumed, swept up by gravity of the big planets) not work as a postulate?”
Well, that’s not even a postulate. You have to read between the lines here. What they are clinging to is the planetary nebula hypothesis, and so by talking about this discovery in context of how the solar system formed, he is implying that the discovery is compatible with the planetary nebula hypothesis.
However, the planetary nebula hypothesis is already defunct, kaput, pushing up the daisies. They have not replaced it with a new model. Therefore, they have no currently viable model for solar system origins. There is no framework that they can fit this discovery into and learn anything about the origin of the solar system. He’s just spewing nonsense at the reporters to make it look like they still know what they are talking about.
you caught me, there.
>>>> What they are clinging to is the planetary nebula hypothesis <<<<
Repetition is not bringing clarification.
According to bare minimum web search (which translates as wiki entry) appearing in results listings for search terms "planetary nebula hypothesis";
Already superseded -- for some time now, we could safely assume. So just what are you talking about, more exactly? Define it, be specific and precise, rather than tossing out loose phrasing, followed by declaring "death" (it's dead, Jim).
If it would be of any assistance, it appears to me there is frank admission among theorists that there is more yet to be known/solved. From under heading Current issues by which they mean "unsolved problems" I take it, there is such as;
Notice that somebody stuck the word “caca” in at the end of that video. Quick, before they scrub it out.