Thanks for posting that. I read through it. That is most professional and well done case I have seen against MQA. Yet, it shows great respect and deference to creators of MQA. It should be a model of how people should conduct themselves in opposing MQA: with real data, scientific analysis and professionalism.German politeness written in international English but a nice analyses of what is going on under the hood of MQA:
https://www.xivero.com/downloads/MQA-Technical_Analysis-Hypotheses-Paper.pdf
BTW, I could take some issues with their points too. Their lossless schemes relies on yet to be established aspect of "timing is very important." That is not an assumption that can be used to then draw other conclusions.
There is also the oft-repeated statement that future advancements make us more aware of audible issues of lossy audio compression. Such has not happened and there is no reason to believe advancements in anything will modify our hearing as such.