I don't think so, some of this advice is good and not buried at all. Take the Your Camera Doesn't Matter page: his gist is entirely correct: `Maybe because it's entirely an artist's eye, patience and skill that makes an image and not his tools.' Some people here should take the advice that `Buying new gear will NOT improve your photography.' Again, his audience are beginners. I don't think his point is that professionals should take things apart line-by-line. And I've seen much, much worse magazines in print.
The most important message, that `no amount of Photoshop or plug-in software filters can replicate good light,' is literally in the second paragraph.
Too much talk here is focussed on noise charts this and dynamic range that. To the point that some people here write here in worries that their `old' camera doesn't stand a chance against newer camera A60. Or that there is `catastrophic noise' in their image. Yet, when we look at it, we see no significant amount of noise. People convince themselves that only, say, L glass (Canon) or gold ring glass (Nikon) is really worth something, so they cough up $1000 extra to get the 70-200 mm f/2.8 IS instead of, say, getting a cheaper alternative and a second lens or putting the money towards a vacation on Hawaii so that he or she can put the new lens(es) to good use.
I find his reviews (except for the subjective feel of equipment) rather useless, but the general articles are quite good for beginners. Some people are criticizing him, because he is a bad photographer. So be it. That doesn't render his conclusions invalid (nor does it bolster his arguments either).
3GS takes much better pics!