If you read on to the language page, they apparently mean tokens and not syntax. They have retained C/C++/Java style syntax, only having renamed some of the keywords and delimiters.
"Ultimately, using a technique we call Token Accuracy Mapping, which is basically a way to figure out which tokens may have caused the problems, it appeared that C-style syntax was plausibly the culprit."
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10775054
...about why you believed the items on my list didn't constitute scientific evidence. Hypothesis, analysis, verification by experimental practice, matched predictions, replication via re-application by diverse crowds, and delivering results. All sounds like scientific method to me. Many studies in academic and industry with these properties over the years.
If you reject all of that, I'd like to see what your version of the scientific method is as it's different than what most fields of study are using. I still contend that my numbered list represents scientific evidence in favor of whatever those methods were applied to. In that case, there's scientific evidence for everything I recommended with varying strength.
I didn't read it.
> The proof is in the literature I'm referencing rather than me dumping all of it in the comment box
You never cited anything.
Most importantly, some of the enumerated "points"? that you espoused are methodology Quorum uses. I'm sure you can help them out, if this subject is of interest to you.
Good. Means my original claim is validated.
"I'm sure you can help them out, if this subject is of interest to you."
Might. Another survey is long overdo too.