I don't know, I think I just disagree with his points (and agree more with the article).

He says: " a still-revered, still-used (niche public) language built by people with an actual high-level concept (TDD) from the academic world with the support of much of industry at the time, said language probably can safely stay on it's pedestal despite such a fluff-brained "analysis" as linked article purports to provide..."

To which I disagree. What do you think I didn't get?