Glad to know his opinion is here well-informed. Perl only came out 30 years ago, so I guess I can understand not having had the time to learn it and just assume that it and other languages must be inferior.
I also didn't learn those in the sense of working with them, but I studied their reference material and numerous examples. That is more than enough for me to see what the underlying requirements are which these languages implement. I don't agree with most of the requirements (by which I mean the detailed specifics, not generalities like "we would like a useful language with good libraries for a wide range of applications" which is a universal).
I've borrowed from some of these languages into my own Lisp dialect. For instance, I like Python's array indexing, with how negative indices work backwards from the end, so I copied it.
I don't claim to say he's correct or not; rather, I'm saying that a bad attitude is inexcusable regardless of correctness. It's perfectly fine to not want to try a language (or even to dislike it), but in that case there aren't any grounds to criticize it.
Obviously I was exaggerating a bit in my original comment, but as I said in my second one, the issue I have with his statement is the attitude, not the content.