I agree with all the points you have presented, in that they seem to make sense to me.

Something you said stuck out to me though (triple asterisks around the word I want to put emphasis around):

> ...are using their own theories of mind and inference ability to read more into Koko's actions than what is really there.

Isn't that a judgement, that one should avoid when doing science. That is to say, the following could also be valid options, unless ruled out:

> ...something else into Koko's actions than what is really there.

> ...less into Koko's actions than what is really there.

Your thoughts?