I read those two paragraphs very differently – I see them as them being critical of AE and supportive of Noonan.
“…so none of those things change the conclusion that there was less than one
chance in a million that they hit the coast like Earhart said they did based on a review of
Noonan’s chart work.”
This passage says that AE’s statement was wrong as it does not match the data that was on Noonan’s chart.
‘If the math isn’t convincing then lets look at it with just common sense. Noonan had just missed
his landfall on the continent of Africa by more than two hundred miles and now Earhart was
going to have him navigate her to a one mile long island in the middle of the Pacific. As my kid
would say, “I don’t think so!”’
Again, this passage is supportive of Noonan. Read it this way: “If Noonan had navigated to Africa and missed by more than 200 miles common sense says that AE would not have confidence in his abilities so would not keep Noonan as her navigator to hit a 1 mile long island in the middle of the Pacific. It is unlikely that she would have kept him if he was that bad a navigator.”