Because any article like this is filled with non-neutral ways of wording statements.

Andy's information is usually well-sourced. I'm not saying to disregard the objective information in his articles, only be wary of his spin on those facts. There ARE people in the space journalism field that are noted for their professionalism and neutrality. Jeff Foust, for instance, is one of them. Andy P is definitely not.

You can write an article claiming almost anything if you include supporting facts and deliberately ignore dissenting facts. The world is full of noisy data.

You can dismiss any evidence you want by pointing out unspecified dissenting facts that might exist, so you gotta be quite specific. That's why assessing things on merit is right, but pointing out that all data is noisy is not the way to go: it's uninformative.

Pointing out that data is noisy as a counterargument to an article is uninformative. Pointing out that data is noisy to encourage critical thinking and make people wary of manipulation is not uninformative.