It's not great phrasing, but I see what he's saying. You're right, It is an oxymoron. He could have just said measurable and been fine. What he does that irks me is he seems to be assuming that there is no safe minimum. Which hasn't been proven.

May we learn to hold you again,
not in clinched fists,
not beneath burning armor.
May this hand be a hearth.
A place for my flame to burn.

A place to radiate from.
This is what fire needs.

May my warmth nurture,
may my warmth not overpower,
may my warmth fuel,
may my warmth dance, again.

We remember warmth,
a hug, a handshake, a look.
The warmth rages now,
Looking for a place to take root,
Where can heat go that it cannot reach?

We are men taught to fear tenderness,
to trade warmth for armor.
But this armor still burns.
The heat contained looking for a way out.

Inverse correlation means one number goes up and the other goes down. What he said is confusing, but correct at the level of terminology.

Did you even read the article? I didn't find anything overtly bad.

I really liked the part where he boiled down human thought and expression into bits. Him being unaware of just how much communication is happening every moment is staggering. It's a really subtle self own.