You point to some interesting notions:
a) the goodness of a chess move made by a human has higher variance than moves made by a computer, and
b) the computer remains constant ... every move.
I agree with the first of your points (as I have rephrased it). A human can get tired while the computer doesn't. A human can get distracted, which the computer does not. Finally, a human can be bluffed by his opponent, which the computer doesn't consider. All these lead to higher variance in the quality of moves chosen by a human.
On the second point, I disagree - if you mean it literally. The computer does indeed seem to play more consistently than a human does, but not every move it makes is of equal goodness. It may have taken the same amount of time to find its move, or gone the same number of plies into the search, but if either of those settings is such that the computer is low-rated, it will look really good for some series of moves and then look really dumb if the critical move is past its horizon. Additionally, most computers use book moves for the opening, so one might say that the computer - until it leaves book - is probably playing 2800 level chess, or nearly so. And, it's likely not to leave book until AFTER the human does.
Still, your article raises interesting points. Thanks for writing it.
an attribute that should be considered to be made apart of game anylysis is something i call "fluctuating rate of a move". one thing i have realized while playing chess is fluctuation of rating playing in the chess game. most likely a person with a high rating is a good player, but in some cases, the person with a high rating i.e. 2000, in a certian position, may make a move a person with a 1400 may make(and most likely in grandmaster games or other master games would be considered a blunder). then in this same game, the person with a 2000 rating in another position may make a move that a person with 2200 may make. so in a sense, every piece that is moved has a rating to it as well, hence the reason why people lose. thats why when a person plays the computer of 2000, it is either more or less harder than playing a human with 2000, because as stated, the human can fluctuate between ratings of moves. but the computer remains a constant 2000 every move. please anybody tell me what they think of this article and if it makes sense to you. thanks