Hey, for starters, could you read the six words in the excerpt that you posted that follow the text that you highlighted, and then take a second shot at your objection.
From Barbarian's post:
From the CRS article:
For the purposes of this paper, neo-Darwinian evolution is defined as the random and undirected natural process in which mutation and natural selection are thought to have produced trees from non-tree photosynthetic precursors over billions of years.
So the paper simply redefines evolution so as to exclude:
"natural selection, mutation, genetic drift, speciation, and changing allelic frequencies"