She does not state that. She states the science developed after The Origin of the Species refutes his theory, it does not back it up. Are you reading the same book?
Perhaps I was not clear in my post. What I said was "This is the way I see it" meaning ME. That was my opinion unless I specifically attributed parts to Ann. Sorry for the confusion.
You're right, she doesn't -- that's because she's writing propaganda, and not an accurate description of the state of evolutionary biology.
She states the science developed after The Origin of the Species refutes his theory, it does not back it up.
...and in order to claim that, she has to grossly misrepresent almost everything in evolutionary biology, and all the evidence for it. She is, in a word, either lying or incompetent on this subject.
Pharmboy's post is an excellent description of the actual state of evolutionary biology. Ann Coulter's description, on the other hand, is designed to grossly mislead her readers by telling falsehoods, half-truths, misrepresentations, and omitting important information.
Are you reading the same book?
I've read it, unfortunately. Her chapters on biology are like reading a Michael Moore book on, well, anything.