> I am just arguing that the author may have reason and dynamic language 
> have some flaws.

A dynamic language + test driven development is considered, in some circles, to 
be incredibly more productive than a static language with both static type 
checking and unit tests. Productivity means robustness, and the more code you 
can _remove_, the more robust you generally get. Dynamic languages and TDD both 
make removing code - refactoring to remove duplication - super easy.

Block closures are a major help, too, because they solve the 'finally' and 
'RAII' issues that plague other languages.

Then, all the static languages tend to bend over backwards to provide dynamic 
features.

The closer to the metal you run, the more static you must be. The farther you 
are (such as the web), the more dynamic you should be.

-- 
   Phlip