Laughable revisionism already thoroughly debunked by Sylvain Gouguenheim many years ago. A real shame as it makes me doubt the objectivity of the entire article.
I hadn't heard of Gouguenheim but his ideas seem rather absurd. He seems to believe the Islamic golden age never occurred, and I can't find how he tries to explain where something like Liber Abbaci came from. His objectivity seems far more suspect than this piece.
The chemistry progressed a lot during that time. Several preserved Arabic works contain a much improved classification of the known chemical substances, better than anything that existed before them.
That chemical classification was improved only in the 18th century, by several generations of Swedish chemists, leading eventually to the modern chemistry based on the notion of chemical elements, which was created by Lavoisier and his French colleagues, shortly before the French Revolution.
Attempting to deny the essential Arabic/Islamic contributions to the evolution of the sciences shows just ignorance or bad intentions.
For further reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)#Mod...