Again who is “your”? If the author (Michelle Froese) is concerned I do not see any contradiction as she quote elements from others before stating her conclusion.
A detail: please @Tom can you explain how your note to me, excepted if I am wrong (“Your comment is awaiting moderation.” " Thank you for that article! " (is Michele Froese or another concerned?) looks to be made some hours before I sent the article? You may have had the link before but the note needs some clarification, especially since there was splitting. Thanks for it.
On the fund you _ and numerous others that are involved in AWE field_ seem to have some difficulties to accept opinions that can be unfavorable to some aspects concerning AWE like the Max Planck Institute did indirectly, or like the linked article concluded.
To be clear I think AWE is more likely to succeed than to fail. But the pros AND the cons should be discussed without a priori.
The AWE reality in 2019 is the same as that described by Mike Barnard on 2014. Barnard's predictions .
So we can say that all is good year after year, or trying to see what goes wrong.