It was a positive review. I don't think you read it. You cherry pick one line over a 100? - Is this neutral?
Milton's book is the third by a science journalist to question neo-Darwinism the other two being by Hitching and Taylor (both mentioned in the article) Spanner further says "He does not by any means cover the same ground as Taylor" - Milton also mentions this on his website about Taylor being a science journalist and questioning neo-Darwinism before him, of course you wouldn't know this becuase you don't read books by Milton. I have seen your edits on Milton's page, you seem to be under the impression he is a "creationist" if you bothered to read his books you would see is is actually a neo-lamarckist, Milton has been misrepresented.

Here is what Spanner says about Milton:

"He writes well, forcefully and with conviction"
""This book is well produced" 

Did you forget those bits?
On a side note - Who is David Spanner? Hes a fundamentalist Christian, who trained as mainly a physicist, he was not an expert on biology, he mainly wrote about thermodynamics and religion, of course he would of disagreed with some of Milton's views becuase Milton is non-religious: Here is Douglas Spanner Douglas Spanner