It is a diversion from the main topic but Flap 5 raised some questions that, because they were so pointed, should receive answers.
It is curious to know why Scientific American has used information from a First Officer with a minor carrier
They didn't.
are we missing something here?
It seems.
Does this chap have knowledge and experience beyond his rank?
I'll let you pilots hash that out. The quoted item does not indicate knowledge of material factors in the accident but it may have been edited.
Could they not find someone more experienced and knowledgeable?
They could have but they weren't looking for anybody.
I fear that the answer goes back to the days when Concorde first flew and the American authorities made every effort to keep it out, because it had not been made by an American company.
Fear not.
This article seems to be another crude attempt to discredit Concorde
Nope - it was not an article.
and it is all the more surprising in such a reputable magazine.
Nope. Scientific American has a section called "News Scans" in which they report on items in the news that pertain to technology or science. In that section a few months ago they ran a positive news item on the return of the Concorde.
What was quoted here, essentially in its entirety, was a brief letter to the editor. The letter was critical of Scientific American's article. That would have been clear had the first few words of the letter been included but they were probably snipped because there would have been no context in PPRuNe. The editors of Scientific American perhaps felt that it was only fair play to air an opposing viewpoint. As usual, editors do not endorse the opinions of their readers even though they publish them.
In Scientific American the authors of major articles get a chance to rebut any readers' letters that are published. I do not think the authors of News Scans items get that opportunity and, Agaricus bisporus, it doesn't seem likely that you will either. Since the journal does not vouch for the opinions of its readers they have no reason to correct them.