I agree with you zeal - sounds like wedesignyourweb has a slight bias against HTML, like with the big headings 'HTML cons' and 'Flash pros'

.
Flash is good for what it's meant to be used for - providing multimedia content that looks pretty. The primary function of a website isn't to look pretty, but to easily provide information - sites in pure Flash get in the way of this by taking longer to download and stopping people from bookmarking and sending links to specific pages.
My response to some of the above:
HTML is static
Didn't you take a look at my examples? Javascript animation effects for HTML have been around for years. People often mistake Javascript powered HTML as Flash.
Fonts
If you want fancy title fonts, you can embed these as images. You don't really want non-standard fonts as text as this makes it harder people to read your content - especially for those with disabilities such as Irlens Syndrome, which makes it more difficult to read text set in a standard font.
Bugs
It's only Internet Explorer 6 that causes headaches and these can be resolved at the end of developing your website. Bugs also existing in Flash - with Apple claiming that Flash is the number 1 reason that Macs crash.
Different browsers
If you hire a good developer, browser compatibility shouldn't be a major issue. It's only Internet Explorer that has different rules on display and we can create alternative CSS for that *nasty* browser.
iPad & iPhone
I wouldn't hold your breath for iPad and iPhone supporting Flash. This has been rumoured since the launch of the iPhone, but is unlikely to happen as Apple want to control what software is released for iPhone and Flash will provide a loophole in their policy.
SEO (Search Engine Optimisation)
Although meta data is handy, it's not what search engines place high priority on. Flash websites have all their content on one page, limiting the effectiveness of link building campaigns. Furthermore, Flash websites can't show search engines anything about the context of information such as if word or phrase in in a section title, list or emphasised as strong/bold, hence further affecting link building SEO and on site SEO. HTML websites will always rank higer than their Flash equivalents.
Interactive & Dynamic
Javascript can provide as much interactivity as Flash to the point that people not in the know refer to Javascript galleries and interactive feaures as Flash. The Javascript equivalent also has the added advantages of being better for SEO and more maintainable - no need to worry about losing your source code files.
Animation
You have a variety of options here - you can embed Flash components, use GIF or use Javascript SVG animations. There are libraries you can use to support SVG via Javascript across all browsers.
Packaged Up
You can have this with Javascript too - you just embed a simple 1 line include in your HTML head and the script will work.
No reload
You can do this with HTML too, but why would you want to limit your users to not having the ability to bookmark pages or send unique page links such as via Facebook?
Built in components
There are plenty of Javascript frameworks such as the excellent MooTools and even more components such as gallery scripts you can use that are freely available.
Immersing experience
This is why most micro sites are done in Flash. It offers the user an experience not just a page view. It has the ability to get people excited about a product or a service.
Audio, video, upload
You have a choice to use a variety of methods to do this in HTML - including using Flash as a component. New native video features in HTML 5 are as good as Flash for playing videos and don't require addition download bandwidth for the Flash player.
Games
Games have traditionally been created in Flash, but this is beginning to change. Javascript also gives you exposure to a wider range of devices than Flash - including iPad, iPhone and Windows Phone 7 series.
Here are some HTML pros to think about:
Maintainability
HTML can be directly manipulated from a server language like PHP, meaning you don't have to edit your server code and your Flash code separately. If you create your site in Flash and require use of server side technologies such as for databases, you have more work to maintain two separate systems.
Backup
If you lose your original Flash code file, you can't edit any further from what you have on your website because you don't have the source code. Javascript and HTML are the source code, so if your offline backup disappears, you can still proceed with whatever you have that's on your website.
Practicality
Flash websites have to download all of their content from the start. Not only does this cause a delay to your website that will turn people away who are in a rush, it will increase your bandwidth costs if you have heavy traffic, annoy people using mobile broadband because it pushes them to exceeding their small data transfer limit and stops people from bookmarking your pages.
Copy and Paste
You can't copy and paste from Flash websites. Maybe a customer wants to store your contact details or someone from the press wants to take a quote from your website - this isn't as likely to happen if they have to make the effort to type your content, especially if it is a lot they have to copy. Ha, I think I will copy and paste this post as an article on my website ;-).
Don't get me wrong - Flash isn't bad. It has it's place, but purely as a website is not the place. There's nothing wrong in using Flash components for a website mixed with HTML - just like you can do with Javascript; developing a whole site directly from Javascript would be pretty silly.