Well, if that’s all you got, I guess you didn’t bother to read the rest of the article.
I did, and it’s just a more complicated version of the same point: rejecting anything that doesn’t fit the “10,000 year” axiom by harping on “but _this_ isn’t completely explained”. At best, alternate theories are half-baked and easily dismantled by pointing at indisputable physical phenomena.
Brings me back to my default counter-argument asserting “the universe is only 20 minutes old; refute that”.