PSS...as usual, you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.
The author merely states that Yockey’s conclusion (that the origin of life is undecidable) is a classic Evo-avoidance technique in the hope that nobody will notice that divine foot in the door.
As for KG, they are clearly departing from neo-Darwinism, no matter how much lip service they pay to the Temple of Darwin. Not only that, facilitated variation makes far more sense from the standpoint of Creation/Intelligent Design.
Try reading the article again for understanding. Although, that might not be enough, for it assumes that you already understand the NDToE, which I am seriously starting to doubt.
And remember...
NOTHING MAKES SENSE IN BIOLOGY EXCEPT IN THE LIGHT OF CREATION AND THE FALL!
NOTHING MAKES SENSE IN BIOLOGY EXCEPT IN THE LIGHT OF CREATION AND THE FALL!
I'll leave those two statements as conclusive proof of the rational debate and instruction from the creationist side of things...