It's generally a good idea to know something about topics upon which one opines; alas, the author of this piece seems to have gleaned what scant knowledge he has from pop science literature and thus is merely repeating what lazy journalists have written elsewhere - and gotten it mostly wrong. Furthermore, the veneer of anthropocentricity layered on top serves only to highlight the limited perspective brought to bear.

The universal questions are indeed interesting, but we've learned over the last 120 years that bringing an anthropocentric perspective results merely in dead-end thinking because the nature of reality is not confined to the default perspective of our primate species, which evolved to cope with limited external environmental factors. One should not therefore begin with assumptions when studying cosmology, but with a healthy skepticism that our implicit ways of thinking about things are not likely to very helpful.