I guess my point was that the book was a good example of how a physicalist worldview leads one to some conclusions that are (in my opinion) wrong. For that purpose it doesn't matter if the author is quoting someone or offering it as his view. My sense was that it was truly his view even if he quoted others in support.

But how does a statement of "fact" that cannot be proven differ from opinion? I can't see how the "fact" of the happiness of hunter-gatherers can be established. I also happen to think that is a fact if one were given the option of living for 85+ years today free of hunger, cold and the continual fear of a violent death they would chose to live in our time. But that fact is my opinion.