Your point #1: "The results in the paper are still a debating topic"
It can be argued that even though I have chosen to debate you, that in itself does not make it a debating topic. The paper was delayed in publishing for a year to conduct independent analysis and gather corroborative evidence. Your assertion is refuted.
Your point #2: "and not much help for hlcs now"
That paper bumped the stock price 25%, introduced new volume, new interest and caused lots of technical bullish signals to appear. Your assertion is refuted.
Your point #3: "all other single molecule sequencers can do it too"
Completely untrue. Your assertion is refuted.
Your point #4: "time will prove every science"
About as useful as "the sun will rise every day" for debate purposes, so refuted as the others.
Your point #5: "wait." [sic]
Yet another gratuitous assertion and similarly gratuitously denied.
The score so far: You have made five assertions. I have refuted them all and generally illustrated that your statements are useless for any sort of meaningful discussion.