But, more back on topic, it seems to me that despite the headline picked suggesting something very controversial, nothing in Dyson's intereview really was.
re: evolution and natural selection vs. random drift, it's not like this are opposing concepts. They're mutually complementary.
re: climate, he's not wrong about humans not understanding how big climate changes (ie: ice ages) worked or what they were caused by. It's not a huge step to suggest that that inability to understand or create predictive models of past climate records suggests current extrapolations may not be very predictive.
No reasons to get everyone riled up like this HN thread has been. Read the article and you'll see it's all very nuanced and not him just saying "EVOLUTION IS WRONG." or "CLIMATE CHANGE ISN'T HAPPENING.".