@brianjakub,
Assuming "rationale Wicki's" politico=religious leanings, I dont deny their oown quote mining of Dr Dawkins. To his credit though, he never closes the door on any hypothesis he later in his same book, discusses the "slam dunk" evidence that Creationists seem to pick and use to "make a case with minimal evidence"
The evidence for evolution isnt that way, Its more like a civil case where the preponderance of evidence supports the proposal and that theres nothing to refute it. Its not a criminal case .
Theres no evidence for hopeful monsters, none. What there is, is a series of assertions that are quite casuistic (its marketing of religious based science in most cases).
I dont buy hopeful monsters and frontloading (borrowing LF's term with my understanding). Now tht we are more able to decode the chemistry of genes and epigenes, we see these vast sludge pools of"acquired" variation many of which are inheritable . I know, Im starting to rethink Lmarck after reading Ward's review and Hazens "evolution" of minerals