Or, in the words of the author: "no plans for its return have emerged across a large number of economical cycles"
First of all - it's a weasel-talk. What is that large number of cycles he's talking about? Why is this number sufficient enough to come to the conclusion? Also, the plans to get back to the gold standard come up all the time, they are just unsuccessful.
(even if I agree with the claim of the article, the argumentation is lousy)