This article reflects little about the true state of affairs within science itself, and more about the author's growing (and justified) impatience with poorly written science journalism -- and the effect that writing has had on our culture.

Much of today's science journalism neglects to properly contextualize the work being discussed. In the world of real science, there is an enormous difference between a solid article and a "puff piece".

A solid article should report on a scientific result which can be (and has been) duplicated. And whatever speculation is needed to spice-up the article and lend everyday relevance to the topic should be labeled as such.

A puff piece generally presents a sensationalist reading of a single, perhaps intriguing, result. The breathless discussion of the result is usually blurred into personal (and unscientific) speculation about the distant future.

Sadly, virtually all of the pop-science reporting on certain fields (including, notably, cancer research, psychology, and nutrition) has been consistently and very badly flawed in recent years. The headlines scream, " Ginger Ale: a New Cancer Cure?" " Eggs: Good Bad For You, Say Scientists!""

Those who express frustration with the slow march of (real, not hyped) progress suffer from a fundamental misunderstanding about how science functions; a widely-held misunderstanding stoked by systematic flaws in modern science journalism.

To take an example from this article, the author states, "Quantum mechanics dictates that our knowledge of the microrealm will always be slightly blurred." This is put forth in support of the notion that "some of [science's] greatest advances impose limits on its own power."

On the contrary! Quantum mechanics did teach us that a person interested in knowing both the the precise location and the precise velocity (or mass) of an electron will wind up disappointed. However, this reflects not a limitation on our capacity for understanding, but rather a revolution in our thinking! That subatomic particles cannot be pinned down enables them to perform all manner of seemingly "magical" acts, such as jumping through solid objects, existing in two places at once, and so on.

These phenomena are real, not artifacts of our flawed understanding. The vast majority of possible real-world applications of revelations such as this have yet to be discovered.

And, within just this one example lies just a huge, untapped reserve of breakthroughs, each awaiting a day where a human mind throws off the shackles of its own inertia and says, "Aha!"

To be followed immediately by a sensationalist puff-piece claiming that quantum particles encourage hair growth in balding men.

You refer people to Scott McClellan - because he's probably the man with the answers.