Hahaha, that's a good point. I just read that part in the original article and decided I didn't need to read any further.
Journalists often twist the words of experts to support their crazy theories in order to prove a point.
With a summation such as that, there really isn't any need to read any further. Cherry picking one or two words (or a phrase) and presenting it as fact is what gives journalists their well deserved bad names.
Check out the movie
Absence of Malice.