[Kunzite]

No, he stated his opinion. You read it as an accusation towards Pentax. That's something different and not "falsehood" in any way. Feel free to disagree and answer with facts or your different opinion.

Wow. Did you ignore my post and responded to something else? :p
I specifically mentioned which are the falsehoods: that Pentax cannot significantly improve the autofocus because it lacks "advantages of getting a live signal from the sensor" (when there are DSLRs with much better autofocus than the current Pentax cameras), and that eye detection isn't possible with a DSLR (it is, and even the K-3iii has that).

The precision of eye detection that is available with almost any mirrorless system nowadays can certainly not be achieved with a DSLR. In terms of focus precision, mirrorless has always had the advantage. Several advantages, actually, if we calculate in live adjustments for focus shifts.

Now you're moving the goalposts from "isn't possible" to "precision". That isn't nice.

One where we discuss calmly and most of all tolerate different opinions.

Including mine? 

Yeah, would be great. The sad thing is: it's just not possible. How do you add live preview, including white balance, exposure compensation, histogram, etc. into an optical viewfinder, for example? Or focus peaking? And absolutely no blackout during bursts? Frame rates higher than let's say 15 shots per second with AF tracking and a usable viewfinder image?

You see, you lack imagination. There's nothing in a SLR design which says that the autofocus must be done by a separate module below the mirror, and metering by a separate sensor in the pentaprism housing. The actual, defining requirement is that a mirror would send light entering through the single/shooting lens to an optical viewfinder.
Actually some SLRs had off the film metering, but with a DSLR another configuration is possible: having both the autofocus and the metering (+WB, subject tracking, etc.) done by the main sensor. It should be obvious now that I said it: the main SLR mirror is actually a half mirror, semi-reflective; part of the light being sent to the viewfinder, part of it reflected by a secondary, full mirror, to the AF module. That is the classic/current configuration.
But what if the main mirror is now a single, still half mirror? The part of the light which passes through would reach the imaging sensor. And now you can do autofocus with tracking, metering etc. with perhaps a one stop loss but otherwise the full capabilities of a mirrorless - with a TTL optical viewfinder (even for the light loss, there are solutions).
I don't want to brag, but I thought about this possibility before seeing Ricoh Imaging patents about this very thing.

That's completely independent of whether you or me or anyone else feel perfectly comfortable and at home in that (future) niche. You can still do so. It's just no longer a place for the majority of users.

Regardless if I'm in a majority or not, my choice should be respected.