Later in the article the writer discusses how the "science" the designers say they were using probably had little to no effect on their design. The design is go

Later in the article the writer discusses how the "science" the designers say they were using probably had little to no effect on their design. The design is good, but not because of this principle. What the writer takes issue with is the attempts to justify design decisions (which may be fine on their own) with bullshit science.