It seems like the article's problem is with the fact that they are being called "conspiracy theories".

The real problem seems to be with theories that (1) have very little or poorly-related evidence and (2) rely on some form of partisan or tribalist hate for their uptake.

It is true that conspiracies seem to figure prominently in this class of theories - for understandable reasons.

However, perhaps we should just propose to rebrand the class.

This comment intends to express no opinion as to the actual status of any specific theory that some may brand as "conspiracy theories".