I've wondered why people believe things about science which just aren't true. The author wrote "science is a repeatable act", but that means astronomy isn't a science. For that matter, nothing can be repeated exactly. I personally blame route memorization of "The Scientific Method" in school.
(Not that my comment here has anything to do with what the author is trying to say, which is more like 'if people don't give your startup money then it might not be because your idea stinks - perhaps you just don't fit the expected pattern and you can change that pattern', with extra ... philosophy ... added for flavor.)
According to the author and in the context of your comment, what the investors are doing is engineering. Engineers apply known principles to new situations, and in fact the engineering analogy is very appropriate for people looking to invest in and build a company.
Could be, but the author wrote "startups are more like art than science" and didn't use the word "engineering" at all. Plus, the same thing could be said of craftsmanship, sports, relationships, and more.
But really, I was only complaining about the general misunderstanding of what science means.
(Not that my comment here has anything to do with what the author is trying to say, which is more like 'if people don't give your startup money then it might not be because your idea stinks - perhaps you just don't fit the expected pattern and you can change that pattern', with extra ... philosophy ... added for flavor.)