Why would anyone need to have expertise in a topic to be allowed to say anything? Sounds like a very dark path to walk to just ban discussion on a topic.
Non-experts can chime in and can often glean insights experts miss. I conjecture -- as a non-expert -- for this article, most laymen will probably come to wackier conclusions than the research really permits. There is a common (and I believe fallacious) conflation between brain size and intelligence. There is also a common (and I believe fallacious) conflation between quick early development and lifelong intelligence.
If brain size alone meant anything, sperm whales and elephants would be rulers of the world. If brain-body proportion alone meant anything, ants would be rulers of the world.
Also, brains at birth and speedy early development can be misleading. Pigeons develop physically and mentally very quickly when born, while crows take much longer to become self-sufficient. Once fully developed, crows are much more intelligent than pigeons. If anything, there may generally be an inverse correlation between taking longer to develop and smarts. Humans take years to start walking and feed themselves, while giraffes take less than a minute to take their first steps.
The research linked in this thread is probably useful to experts in the field. Without further expert interpretation, I am not sure what value laymen could glean from this study other than a factoid or two. However, I think my comment and a couple of others may be insightful, so sharing the article to start a conversation is not meritless.
