It seems to me that the author just don't feel comfortable with MWI. He feels threatened by it, in the same way people didn't feel comfortable with Copernic, an

It seems to me that the author just don't feel comfortable with MWI. He feels threatened by it, in the same way people didn't feel comfortable with Copernic, and just decide that it has not to be right. Doesn't look like a good basis for doing science. In my opinion, MWI is the simplest explanation. In all the others you have to add strange components to make it works. In David Deutsch's "The fabric of reality" there is a good philosophic defense of many worlds. At some point he says something along the lines of: "if in the double-slit experiment photons are interfering with ghost-photons, what it means to say that those particles doesn't exist 'in reality'? "