What Darwin Got Wrong

How can one make sense of neutral mutation without understanding and applying natural selection? The authors of the article say that evolution "is explained by the selection of phenotypic traits by environmental filters". So why do they claim neo-Darwinism fails because changes in phenotypes which result in the same fitness pass through this filter?To use an analogy, they are complaining that a seive doesn't work because fine silt goes through the seive all the while ignoring the rocks that are captured by the seive. They further claim that the seive is useless because the amount of material that goes through the seive far outweighs the number of rocks it captures. At the same time gardners are saying that the seive is useful because it explains why they can separate rocks from silt.Frankly,they can't see the forest for the trees.

Such an approach would be an improvement over the criticisms used by the authors in the OP. To use your analogy, you should write a book that criticizes Newton for suggesting that gravity was the only force that matter particles experienced. You should also scathingly criticize gravitationalists for ignoring the weak and strong forces when looking at nuclei. Each year physicists are finding that there is more than just gravity in action when looking at particles with mass, but the dogmatism of Newtonists stifles such research.That's how silly it seems to me, even if there are some good points here and there in the article.