G. M. Philip
Abstract
"The coiling of the Liassic oyster Gryphaea is discussed and the assessment of tightness of coiling investigated.
Hence Hallam's statistical work on Gryphaea is interpreted and from his original measurements a highly significant increase in the tightness of coiling is demonstrated in the Gryphaeas of the higher Sinemurian horizons of Britain.
The presence of a strong natural selection pressure favourable to more tightly coiled individuals of the communities is indicated, and the nature of the lineage discussed.
It is suggested that recent criticisms of Trueman's work lack foundation."
So it appears that not all scientists agree with your article's main point.
Did you happen to notice your link is from 10 years ago?
It’s unclear just what ‘recent’ criticisms are lacking foundation.
“Oysters have the unfortunate distinction that they were one of the first examples of an alleged proof of evolutionary lineage in the fossil record (mooted by paleontologist A.E. Trueman in 1922).1 The ‘flat’ oyster, Ostrea sp., was said to have evolved into the coiled shell Gryphaea sp. Several generations of science students were taught this as ‘one of the best documented cases of evolution’ in the fossil record.
However, today it seems that coiling is a built-in programming response to the environment, i.e. mud-sticking oysters grow into a coiled cup-shaped form, while oysters attaching to firmer substrate2 grow to be ‘flat, fan-shaped recliners’.3 So, coiling is an individual growth response to local environment; not a millions-of-years evolutionary twist.”
Yet another example of evolutionary fraud. Eventually the fabrications catch up to you...