He’s apparently claiming as Harshman did that most mutations are strictly neutral. This is something the population geneticists reject, so it cannot be a correct response to GE. He doesn’t understand the secular literature, so why think he understands GE either?
However, @Joe_Felsenstein also brought up Junk DNA in his big multipoint response. I don’t have the direct link handy, but he didn’t explain how Junk DNA is supposed to solve the problem of GE.