You're going to have to explain that one.
If we're meant to be debating against an assertion that, because wrapping yourself in bubble tape would be silly, inconvenient, and not that much safer (an unproven and hyperbolic assumption) airplane customers ought to be able to lean their seats back, as it is also inconvenient, silly and and not much safer (which again, is an assertion that is provided without any further scientific backing or reasoning on the part of the quote you opened with;) then the first thing to do is explore the premise. Which is inherently flawed as far as logic goes.
The original assertion which you supplied provides no hard evidence or logic on it's own - and yet you are now demanding a burden of proof from any who would disagree with you.
I would reconsider using a TV show as a "fact source" for anything that isnt basic science. Anyways, what was implied in the quote was that a plane is well above the survivable crash altitude, in which case, bracing wont do jack.
http://www.airspacemag.com/need-to-know/NEED-seatbacks.html?c=y&page=1 pretty well explains it, I think. And http://flightsafety.org/ccs/ccs_jan-feb88.pdf is a verifiable study on the brace position, complete with references.
Your quote speaks only of the requirement to place your seat in an upright position during take-off and landing. These are not only the most likely times for an accident - it is also during these moments when the plane is more likely to be at a survivable height. (And this backed up in the links I already provided.)
Edit - Hmm... I just read the comments section of that smithsonian article, and realized that's where the quote you supplied came from. Well, if that article didn't explain it you sufficiently, then I'm certainly not going to be able to offer any further education - because it looked pretty cut-and-dry to me.



