Did you just pull these up from a random google search? I stopped reading the first one once I saw it's bibliography starts at the Church of God newspaper and low-quality wikipedia articles and gets less useful from there. Even though the wikipedia page for the second publication cites no sources and simultaneously claims to have been founded in the 19th century and 1970, it seems more sanely reasoned. However, I don't see how it supports your argument in any way. In fact, the author seems to be just as concerned about automation as I am, which is more than others:

William Strauss, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, stated that “on average, manufacturing output has been growing 3.1% annually over the past 63 years. Automation has enabled U.S. manufacturers to produce significantly more with fewer workers than they did in previous decades. Today, 177 workers can generate as much output as 1,000 plant employees could produce in 1950. Far from a cause for concern, the dramatic loss in manufacturing jobs should be seen as a key metric of success.”

Strauss under-plays the effect on all workers who lose in this game, and he doesn’t even mention what the loss of manufacturing will do to R& D or exports.

I wouldn't call R&D a generally low-skill job loss concern. Beyond that I didn't see anything that addressed your argument. Please enlighten me.