Dan Brown is more realistic than Ken Wilber

So says Andrea Diem-Lane in her Integral World article on Dan Brown's latest novel Origin. An excerpt:

"[It] struck me as quite ironic that the fictional Edmond Kirsch's speculative theories on life's origin and future trajectory was much more evidential and persuasive than Ken Wilber's Eros theory about the cosmos. To put this into sharper relief, the novelistic truth embedded in Origin sheds a clearer light than the supposedly 'non-fictional' metaphysics espoused in Integral Theory. The science in Dan Brown's fiction, in other words, is more properly grounded and carries more weight than most of what one finds in Wilber's later tomes. This may come as no surprise to his many critics, but it is disconcerting when one finds greater insight in Dan Brown's latest novel than in Ken Wilber's attempts at Integral science."