The article even claims, highlighted in the article, "It is obvious that so-called “functional” programming is flawed, it makes redundant things like refactorin

The article even claims, highlighted in the article, "It is obvious that so-called “functional” programming is flawed, it makes redundant things like refactoring and unit testing unnecessarily easy". If you are not capable of judging it as blatant sarcasm, I would in fact call you incompetent. I doubt that is the problem. I think most people didn't read long enough for the sarcasm to be obvious and then wrote their comments as if they had read it all, despite probably not making it longer than the first paragraph. That might not be incompetent, but it is at least intellectually dishonest.