Thanks for breaking down the claims in that article which I also read when it came out and was initially disheartened (being relatively new to EOS and the principals involved). I did at the time recall quite a bit of shade which was cast on Ethereum while it was still being created - there were definitely a lot of people desperately trying to defend BTC and cast doubts on whether ETH and its Turing complete contracts could ever work (okay, it had and will have some bugs). Thanks for bringing that up too.
If you look at the numbers already over $70M in ETH invested in the ICO and another 2 days to go. And that's for only 20% of the EOS tokens so we're up at $350M-ish, and quite possibly by the end of the first stage $500M cap based on the full 100%. Of course the price could crater once listed on Bitfinex - who knows - and it could run out of people interested in the remaining ICOs. Either way this is a serious amount of money pouring into something that isn't even working yet so I'm really not surprised that there's FUD-a-plenty being invested.
But hey, I also read people saying that it was in everyone's best interest to have as few as possible people participating in the IC to maximize the payout. So maybe those writers pissing on EOS's strawberries are all heavily invested in it and just trying to scare people away???
As you point out, some of their claims should be easily provable or disprovable - I'd love to see someone do that and clear these EOS guy's names once and for all.