Gordon Moore's article might have started a conversation, but it wasn't the only beat in the story of how genome sequencing costs came down. I remember when my niece was trying to get funding for her genetics lab years ago; they were always talking about new equipment, not just some old article.
To frame it as if one paper gave all the context for two decades of research is to miss the arc of genuine scientific effort.
It's like saying a recipe for paella from the 70s is the only reason every chef today knows how to cook; there are so many turns in the road, new ingredients, and different hands involved.
The real stakes were always in the daily work, the grants, and the bright minds pushing limits, not just one early observation.