The piece on evolutionary theory is just waffle. A typical piece of half-arsed popular science journalism. Yes, Darwin did not refer to "survival of the fittest" in Origin, in fact, he was extremely dubious about the expression being misused at all to describe his theory. Next, "survival of the fittest", as described by the ignorant writer of the piece, has nothing to do with individuals or species or whatever, but has everything to do with what Darwin might have called heritable traits, or what we might call genes. I'm a bit surprised you did't pick up on that, Stu, to be honest. Oh yes, Wacko. You can have "professors" of this, that or the other, with PhDs in the other, that, or this, and you can hang on their every word, etc. (as indeed you do, even though you don't understand any of their words), but do that at your peril. I know some blokes round my way who play guitars, mandos and fiddles who have never had a minute's training but who understand more about their art than many a professor of music. Lose the sycophancy for once and get real!