Thank you for posting this. Sorry about the wasted extra effort.
The article is typical naturalistic double-talk. ‘Evolution’ is fact. We well understand the mechanism of evolution and there exists much evidence for it. As it happens there is also much evidence that contradicts our primary mechanism but that evidence is explained by other mechanisms that we sort of sketch out in response to this confounding evidence as needed. Nonetheless, ‘evolution’ (whatever it is) is fact.
Evolution does not predict anything, therefore it can claim credit for anything. It can never be shown to be false because of this.
A true scientist builds a model and trains it with data from nature, then he uses the model to predict what happens next. Usually using advanced math to transform the data into a domain that is more proximate to reason.
Evolution is for those who like magic thinking. Not for scientists.
Oh, and by the way, true science is never “settled”, it is always being extended and changed and improved. Those who like to say evolution is settled science are politicians, not scientists. However, they may wear a white lab coat and claim to be the oracles of science.