The points that Winer has made are more subtle than this. Any convincing rebuttal would be more subtle. That title is if anything less subtle. If there were a point at that link that was actually responsive to Winer, I presume you would have quoted it.
If you scroll down the article by Scott Helme, you can see that he does respond to Winer specifically. Here is the link with a fragment that goes to that section of the article:
https://scotthelme.co.uk/https-anti-vaxxers/#davewiner
Since you asked for a quote, here it is:
> It's pretty easy to see that Dave's problem really is with Google here and I disagree with this on many fronts. First, ...
(Read the article to see the rest to avoid copying the whole thing.)
Since you insisted, I clicked through, and read until I got to this gem:
Google has never said they're going to deprecate HTTP, the only things that have been said are around changing visual indicators for HTTP and HTTPS in the browser...
Perhaps the word "deprecate" has some idiosyncratic personal meaning for this yokel. I've seen the over-the-top warnings Google came up with for valid self-signed certificates, and their warnings for no certificate at all won't be much relaxed in comparison. The most popular browser loudly insisting that users never go to non-TLS sites would certainly be a deprecation.
Kudos for keeping the thread alive, though...
Yes. See the section titled 'Arguments against securing the web'.
https://scotthelme.co.uk/https-anti-vaxxers/