I know this person from many ways. Here is a simple version of the education background of the author: He pursued a PhD from TsingHua university in China, but failed (Or he chose to quit.) Then he got an offer from Cornell and then quit within one (or two?) years. After that, he tried to pursue a PhD from Indiana University in programming language area but failed again. Now he got a master degree and got a job. In many ways, he is really not a researcher in programming language field.
I don't want to judge someone from his/her education background. But keeping saying "I'm a PhD, my research is about programming language and my advisor is some guy who you should believe" really doesn't help his argument. To be honest, I can hardly find the main argument he want to make. If he just want to say that FP and OO both have their cons and pros, then I totally agree and I really think it doesn't need such an article to say this simple fact. But the author seems have other things to say, which to me is quite vague and I can hardly get it.