Thanks for doing this; your criticism is precisely what I was thinking a few lines into the piece. To echo the other thing Douglas_Knight said, though, it's helpful to say something at the top that lets people know whether this is a worthwhile read for them. (For instance, the Scooby Doo post's title makes it pretty clear to most people whether or not it's the sort of thing they want to read right now.)

In this case, it would have been relevant to say that (in your analysis) the linked article isn't of interest for any quality insights, but mainly because it's been published in a prestigious journal and thus illustrates the (embarrassingly shallow) current level at which academics publicly engage with transhumanist ideas. (There are more deft/polite/high-status ways to briefly convey this information, of course.)