The post's logic goes like this: Evolutionary Biology originally has mistaken idea X. Person A corrects idea X with a more sophisticated idea Y. 30 years later,

The post's logic goes like this: Evolutionary Biology originally has mistaken idea X. Person A corrects idea X with a more sophisticated idea Y. 30 years later, Gould corrects idea X with idea Z. The crime Gould is accused of is in arguing for his idea Z while ignoring the earlier idea Y. By the way, the earlier idea Y is pretty fatally flawed in the first place. It is based on the idea that the size/length/information content of a program is the same thing as the complexity of the program's behavior, which we now know is totally false. So its amusing that the author is so rabid in its defense.