I'm reminded of Goethe's description of an athiest as a person with 'no invisible means of support'.
As I was reading, I was hoping to find an aside about the role of lead in glass production, but I suppose that'd be a distraction.
Intuitively the latter does feel closer to the truth (although maybe quantum computer would be even closer to reality). Or maybe that's just our contemporary lens of viewing technology and our place in the world, who knows what's next in a few hundred years. :)
edit: link for more context https://metaphors.iath.virginia.edu/metaphors/24583
but i guess that's the rhetorical move being used, substitute something the audience doesn't understand with something they do understand.
But I agree, it’s not a compelling argument especially when you do understand at least a bit of both domains.