I give myself the right, as having an opinion. It feels like you're saying that all opinions are equally valid and that we shouldn't strive to critically evaluate and debate things.
While there are different ways to evaluate any given topic, all opinions are not equally valid.
You're missing the point. Knowledge is a physical arrangement of neurons. If there are a finite amount of atoms, there's a finite arrangement of atoms. Neurons are made from atoms.
The fact that such a limit obviously exists contradicts the notion of infinite growth, regardless of how large that limit appears. The power of exponentiation ensures that this limit is practically within reach.
If the premise of infinite growth is wrong, then we should be thinking of alternatives sooner rather than later. That was my takeaway from the article.