Not at all!
If you read the article, he’s basically saying “we don’t know”, we’re not sure”, “we may be to stupid to understand”, et cetera, etc.
Bleakly honest, really.
I did read the article, and saw what you were talking about; i.e. the “we don’t know”, we’re not sure”, etc. But then he adds the 2% statement which seemed to diametrically oppose everything he said before.