I don't think it's inaccurate at all. Software development needs a scientific revolution equivalent to that of medicine, wherein every pattern and practice has

I don't think it's inaccurate at all. Software development needs a scientific revolution equivalent to that of medicine, wherein every pattern and practice has to be backed up by evidence from a randomised, controlled trial. I remember sitting in a "software quality" workshop organised by a coder at an old employer. He was enumerating various patterns and best practices, and yet I realised that nothing he was saying was backed up by any evidence beyond appeals to emotion and anecdotes. If he had been trying to sell me on a new religion or a health product, I would have rejected his arguments out of hand, so why should the standard be lower for software development?