He didn't publish the article in Scientific American or the Wall Street Journal. He published it to a blog, which certainly validates the use of opinion. It was interesting and thought-provoking to read. Why can't it stand alone on those merits? Does every published work have to quantify a finding in concrete and irrefutable terms? Of course, I'm not denigrating works that do quantify such things, but neither do I think we should denigrate works such as this because they are, by definition, inconclusive.
Slashdot Mirror
He didn't publish the article in Scientific American or the Wall Street Journal. He published it to a blog, which certainly validates the use of opinion. It was interesting and thought-provoking to read. Why can't it stand alone on those merits? Does every published work have to quantify a finding in concrete and irrefutable terms? Of course, I'm not denigrating works that do quantify such things, but neither do I think we should denigrate works such as this because they are, by definition, inconclusive.