Interesting. Since I started (circa 1992?) helping research the disappearance, I believed the best approach is to find some evidence that AE could not have made it to Nikumororo; in other words, can the hypothesis be disproven? I scoured all of the documentary telegrams and radio reports, put them in chronological order, so that I could best determine the winds and cloud conditions during the flight, along with knowledge of how FN navigated. This resulted in the Monte Carlo simulation of her flight up to the point when she said "we are on you but cannot see you". After that, there is no navigational information available to determine what she did until she said "we are on the line 167/337". I researched fuel consumption as well, and found that the possibility of her making it to Nikumororo was real and positive. All of this was in the mid-90's. Since then, TIGHAR has accumulated an awful lot of evidence also supporting the hypothesis; some lines of research didn't pan out, but nothing was found that could disprove the basic hypothesis.
The chances of finding aircraft parts with serial numbers is beginning to become vanishingly small, given budgetary constraints. DNA evidence may be the last hope for conclusive proof, but is also proving difficult to achieve. The only other way to attack the hypothesis is going in the opposite direction: is there any evidence that she ended up elsewhere? Despite my work, radio signal analysis by others, tidal analysis, numerous sonar cruises to find plane debris west of Howland, multiple expeditions to Saipan, etc., none of these efforts have been able to disprove the Niku hypothesis. Sure, there are people vehement that she crashed and sank, or was captured, but there is no evidence (only anecdote and mostly unverifiable anecdotes at that) to support any of the alternatives. And what about alternative explanations for the articles found on Niku? Taken one item at a time, there's always a reasonable alternative explanation, but when taken as an ensemble, it becomes harder and harder to explain all of them away.
So I tend to agree with the blog. Absolute proof requires extraordinary evidence and that is always in short supply.
JMHO.