P.S. What's funnier is that their assumption requires an even bigger leap of faith than their conclusion, i.e. more people are inclined to believe that P ≠ NP

P.S. What's funnier is that their assumption requires an even bigger leap of faith than their conclusion, i.e. more people are inclined to believe that P ≠ NP than that if someday somebody did find a tractable algorithm for SAT, that algorithm would surely work by division into smaller subproblems.