As much as the hypothesis in the title appeals to me, I don't think there's anything in the article to substantiate it. The whole thing is a repetitive pattern

As much as the hypothesis in the title appeals to me, I don't think there's anything in the article to substantiate it. The whole thing is a repetitive pattern of {cite some scientific finding}, {blindly assert that the same (or, at some point, the inverse!) applies to this unrelated subject}. Bleh.