Any publication which has “can bes” and “may bes” is not scientific and means nothing. This reads like something from Omni magazine.
I thought the author did a very good job on his research material and presented an interesting read.
You can recognize real science specifically because it *is* written that way.
As a working scientist, I can spend my whole career researching a topic. I have certain ideas (hypotheses) about it that I try to test, and I try every way that I can think of to show that my ideas are wrong. But I cannot know that I have done everything possible to disprove my ideas, so when I write about my work, I sprinkle my writing with "maybe" "possibly" "suggests" and a lot of other words meant to convey that my interpretation of the data is not necessarily correct, but it's the best interpretation I have.
It is a real possibility that after I have published my results, someone else will come along and say, "Dr. exDemMom did not consider this particular line of evidence; therefore, we think that her data supports *this* alternative idea." And so on.
Quacks (usually trying to sell you something) offer a level of certainty that does not exist. Scientists cannot prove anything with absolute certainty, and are honest about it.