The article promises evidence, but it starts by repeating the premise half a dozen times, then offering correlations and loose theories. If there was evidence in there, I missed it. Maybe there was. But even if there was this was a badly formatted article. Why can't people succinctly describe their thesis and then have a nice outline for the fine details on the proof? Is this not something we learn at uni, or even hi…
The structure on this article is the standard academic one, adapted to a less formal style. The authors first succinctly describe their findings so you can know if you want to read the article at all. Then they fully describe their findings, like you seem to want, and only then they talk about the evidence and how it was gathered.