My first instinct was that this was bad and designed to spread misinformation. However, on second thoughts, science is not religion and can stand up to sincere challenges and questions. In fact, if these people are serious and dedicated to truth, perhaps they will advance science by challenging assumptions and asking new questions.
I think we should welcome it.
Except challenging evolution is like challenging F=ma
If it's not peer reviewed, it's not rigorous. If it's not rigorous, it's bound to publish much more misleading or outright wrong content. Couple it with the possibility of ideological motivation (come on, who are we kidding?), and no... we should not welcome this. It's a net negative for progress.
Does science have the tools to "stand up to" it? Yes. Will society? No way.