Of course these are the BEST teachers, but a) Not being the best doesn't mean you're not good enough b) In his piece he actually recommends young chess player

Of course these are the BEST teachers, but a) Not being the best doesn't mean you're not good enough b) In his piece he actually recommends young chess players to learn from numerous books authored by accomplished and highly experienced chess teachers such as Seirawan or Silman. Which part of his advice exactly would you call out as useless? "The fact that my calling out his authority and credibility seems to rile up so many people says something about the crowd here. The crowd here is anti-intellectual, anti-credential, anti-experience, and anti-expertise" You yourself did not back up your criticism with any credentials (we don't know who you are and why we should pay attention to your objections), not to mention that you didn't even point out any particular flaws in the article. Thus your comments (as of now) have no expertise value by your own standards.