"Epigenetic memories" is different than colloquial "memories". The article seems to completely miss this. And of course people who haven't been exposed to that domain specific concept are likely to misinterpret it.
Ok, now this is something!
So, please enlighten me, what could be the political agenda being pushed by an article pondering around whether memories can be inherited or not?
"Epigenetic memory" is the term of art I was taught in grad school. Either they've changed that in the last 10 years, or ch4s3 is attempting to assert a different definition of "memory" than the one used in the field.
They are also incorrect. DNA methylation is an actual methyl group chemically binding to an actual DNA nucleotide, and staying there. When we flip a bit on a hard drive platter we call that "memory" as well.
[0] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=MJO2lYIAAAAJ&hl=en