If you read his comments - I am sure you are correct that he thought it would be a supportive piece!
Seems that way:
Batteroo's chief executive, Bob Roohparvar, became notably upset when Jones' arguments were put to him
Of course he's going to get upset when people come out with proper supported engineering facts that don't match up to their claims.
He's all too eager to engage all and sundry who want to do marketing pieces for him, but has never once contacted me or other bloggers about any of our concerns, nor tried to defend his product in a technical forum on either Youtube video comments, this forum, or my blog page. (The Batteriser "Fang Page" child doesn't count). Nor has he ever offered any for actual testing.
As a professor he should know that the best way to defend your position and claims to fellow technical people is provide the data, and let people recreate your test results. Yet in what, 3-4 months now he hasn't provided a shred of credible data to back anything. What they have come out with has only been met with laughter from the engineering community, as evidences by the 100+ pages on here and elsewhere, and the experts quoted in the article, one even used the word "ludicrous". And rightly so, because it's so far from credible engineering data you'd think it's a parody.
Yet his main defense seems to be an appeal to authority because he's got a PhD and is a professor, and his brother has 500+ patents.
I found the article refreshingly good journalism.
Yes, Hannah is to be congratulated.