I was only able to get about half way through the article, but there's one glaring point.
A NASA rep stated something as matter-of-fact without supporting evidence. One mis-step, and the entire organization is discredited, even thought further evidence has been brought forward.
Then turn around and state as matter-of-fact the opposite without supporting evidence of thier case.

By the way, the 2001 picture looks to me like a life-casting of a pregnent woman. So it must be a celebration of reproduction.