Does the Darwinian theory require modification or replacement?

As I understand it the plant meristem produces chemicals called auxins which promote cell growth and elongation. What is interesting about auxins is that they degrade in the presence of light, so the side of the plant nearest a light source experiences reduced growth compared to the side in the shade. Consequently, this asymmetrical growth causes the stem to bend towards the light source. At least that's how I remember it when I learned it in standard grade Biology in about 1993. I fail to see the intelligence in this scenario.

It would also seem that Wright was quote mining Dobzhansky: This article is not the same as the one cited by Wright, but is a reappraisal of the 1950 Scientific American Article. Note the bolded section that was omitted by Wright which makes it clear that Dobzhansky was arguing against the idea of the human eye appearing fully formed from an eyeless precursor.

That depends, do you think Shapiro or Wright are suggesting that genetic information is being transmitted from proteins to nucleic acid, and if so can you quote the relevant data?