In an odd, disturbing, controversial and perhaps not easily noticeable sort of way...

Noe!

No

i like turtles

This is absurd on every level.

I just like the scene with the fire-extinguisher

After having read the article you linked, I concede that her points are rather interesting, and perhaps can be applied to a broader, humanistic perspective.

If we are to view Kubrick's Odyssey as a symbol of human triumphalism over the material world, then it is important to consider what the film says about the goal toward which human progress is striving. In 2001, we see an unsympathetic and indifferent vision, where human emotion has been channeled toward function. For example, the film has no female characters, so the character's sexual neediness must be sublimated toward their mission. The world which Kubrick depicts is a cold one, and this is highlighted more poignantly with Hal who, in his final moments, is shown as being more human-like than the crew members, as he pleads for life.

The lack of any discernible humanistic lineament makes the audience question whether or not such visions of technical advancement are justified. "What is at work here is an uncontrollable and self-destructive will that is not accompanied by a vision of any minimally [recognizable virtuous path]" (Sesardic, 2009). The moral being that "dreaming of progress without anyone needing to be good is as perilous as dreaming of systems without anyone needing to be good" (Pearce, 2021).

In that sense, it can certainly be argued that Noe's message in Irreversible (if it is indeed a response to 2001) is that humanity is not yet ready to explore space when the world they inhabit is in disarray, withering, and in the throes of death.

Still, despite this, I believe the better contrast between spiritual and material primacy was made with Solaryis, where Tarkovsky subtly implied that humanity is not ready to transcend the temporal world (space) when they have not yet explored the deepest and fullest potential of the spiritual one (themselves).