@BarrenPlanet@c.im I don't really agree that the gene is always or even usually the unit of selection: so much of my work is in discovering gene regulatory networks, involving hundreds or even thousands of loci, that I have a hard time believing selective pressures don't act on those networks at least as much as on the individual genes.

On a larger scale, I disagree with the gene-centric rejection of group selection. It may have started with kin selecton, but in social species it's gone far beyond that. As an obvious example, _Homo sapiens sapiens_ and _Canis lupus familiaris_ are far more successful together than either would be on their own, often acting against groups quite closely related to one or the other. Really I think we need to see "unit of selection" as a fuzzy classification at best.

All that being said, it doesn't really matter in arguing against this particular creationist straw man. Genes which cooperate with other genes, individuals who cooperate with other individuals, groups that cooperate with other groups ... all do quite well compared to going it alone.