I have come to this thread a little bit late so sorry for that.
I read the article, which seemed to promise a lot, and came to the conclusion that the author simply hadn't learnt the basics, let alone any detailed research. Darwinian evolution implies a lot of failed mutations before the imposition of a successful one, a small fact that he appears to forget. Bicycles don't escape this rule! (nor a lot of other everyday things). Some, even very good, technical changes don't manage to impose themselves - in spite of all the efforts of people like this guy. An example of this is the alternative to the computer keyboard developed in the late 70's or 80's which used 5 keys arranged in the shape of your fingertips. I can't remember what it was called; one of the vets at Gloucester AHO used one and swore by it.
He is a bit off the mark with the Mochet bikes. Guy's son kept making them after his father's death. The ban was a setback but not an end of the affair. A Mochet bike also won the Paris-Limoges road race in I think 1934 although the result was changed after the ban and the entry has disappeared from the records. Another recumbent was the Wonder Véloriz, made in St Etienne, which took part in the Cyclo-tourist trials in 1935 but which was penalized by a weight of around 15kg when the winning machine was just over 10kg (fully equipped!). An evolution which did not impose although Raymond Henry's
history of french cyclotourisme has a photo of a Mochet bike in a group of senior cyclotourists apparently in 1938. (After that came WW2 and then the development of Solexs and 2cvs which could be seen as a different evolutionary direction).
I am of course not using a QWERTY keyboard to write this