This chapter responds to several accusations that a REC-inspired program for explaining the natural origins of content—the NOC program, for short—is doomed to fail. Section 1 responds to a preliminary general concern that the NOC program is internally incoherent when seen in light of the Hard Problem of Content—a problem identified by RECers themselves. Section 2 considers a different, more softly pitched complaint against the NOC program—namely, that in drawing a sharp distinction between basic, contentless, and content- involving kinds of cognition, REC gives succor to continuity skepticism, the specific complaint being that REC is at odds with evolutionary continuity. Section 3 casts doubt on the idea that REC motivates this kind of continuity skepticism by offering a sketch of how the natural origins of content could be explained in a gapless, REC-friendly way that does not violate evolutionary continuity. Finally, Section 4 considers how REC fares against a different, philosophically motivated variety of continuity skepticism.