I grant that we read what we want to believe, but this is true of everything, whether true or false.
I can't convince you that the article is not thin other than pointing out that most writing is about communicating a handful of (and often just one or two) elaborated ideas.
That's fine but this idea was better communicated by simply pointing to the original piece - Feynman's speech.
This article was a rehash of Feynman's speech plus a lot of "managers do this, down with managers!". Ironically in its blanket unqualified assertions the article itself is what it complains about - junk science.
I can't convince you that the article is not thin other than pointing out that most writing is about communicating a handful of (and often just one or two) elaborated ideas.