No. Although I occasionally make mistakes, there is no grammatical error in that sentence. Was it just too long for you?
There was nothing of substance in that article.
While nothing in it is fundamentally new thinking, what it says is quite substantial. I'd say it is the prevailing view of scientists who think about the meaning of closed, time-like loops which GR does not prohibit.
That's fine. Defend your sloppy sentence like Durbin defends his gaffe. That's the trend these days. I don't really care and usually don't get anal about such petty things. Sorry for bugging you about it. Have a nice evening.