It appears you are trying to shift the emphasis from the argument itself to the particular semantics of how things are being said. This is undesireable. I am speaking about the irrelevancy of his argument, not the irrelevancy of his statement. His statement is clearly relevant. To rehash -- Despite the fact that evolution is still going -- on a suitably local (say, 100,000 years) timescale -- humans have reached a major plateau in intelligence.