I was. I can tell you that all of those quotes require a great deal of inspection and you cannot take them at face value.
At the very least, most scientists speak ultra-confidently about this beliefs (beyond their own internal level of confidence) because they've learned to use narrative techniques to make their beliefs sound true.
Any scientist who is actively speculating that this funding is "strong evidence" rather than saying "it's logically consistent and seems more than coincidental" is just wrong. That's a big mistake a lot of the early folks who claiimed it was human engineered made. The evidence is not strong, but not strong enough to convince a rational person.