I strongly disagree. Literally every item in there makes perfect sense if you have an understanding of how evolution works.

E.g. many of these items are simply vestigial in some sense, where their presence doesn't actively harm the species and it doesn't impose any substantial energy budget. E.g. the current top comment here is about male nipples. Male nipples may be "useless", but they're not actively harmful (and they can certainly be pleasurable during sex), so there is no evolutionary pressure to get rid of them. The perineal raphe (i.e. the "male taint stitch") also has no purpose but is simply a byproduct of how the male forms in utero.

As the article points out, most of the other "quirks" are simply what evolution had to deal with. You may say the eye is "weird" because the photoreceptors lie behind the ganglion cells, but it certainly works quite well, generally. And it doesn't "have to" be this way. Octopus eyes are completely the opposite and a great example of convergent evolution.

Other examples are simply tradeoffs. There is pretty obvious survival advantage for humans having a large brain, but this then adds complexity for how the head gets out of the relatively small pelvic canal.

I honestly didn't see any examples in this list that aren't well understood and well explained by scientists. If anything most of these provide excellent examples of how evolution works.