I understand the theory – an extending zoom 'sucks air in and pumps it out', a front-focusing lens does the same thing but to a lesser degree, and a lens with internal focus/zoom is 'mostly sealed'. Yes, Canon (and other vendors) use sealing methods (membranes, brushes around the barrel, etc.) to 'filter' out the dust from the air being moved.
But what Roger Cicala is saying is that the theory that extending zooms are dust pumps and therefore the lenses are filled with dust is bogus. The EF 70-200mm zooms seem to collect a lot of dust, but they're internal zoom and focus. The front-focusing EF 85/1.2L is often dusty, but the internal-focusing Nikon 105/1.4 is also dusty.
I think his interpretation of what's really happening is the correct one – there's an ample amount of dust in all lenses (even new ones direct from the factory), it's just that the dust is more easily seen with some lenses, namely the ones that have a high degree of magnification provided by the front or rear elements. That's because when you look through those elements, they magnify the dust on the other elements in the lens. He called that out specifically in a comment, stating anecdotally that looking through the front element of one lens, the second element appeared very dusty but when they removed that front element, the dust on the second element 'disappeared' (which of course it didn't, it was just not nearly as evident without the magnifying glass effect of the first element).
The other important point about lens dust – the reality is that it's just not that big a deal. The reason is pretty simple...for dust in the lens to show up in an image it needs to be in focus, but the only point within the lens at which the light is effectively in focus is at the aperture/iris diaphragm, i.e. a hole where dust can't settle. Dust on any of the element surfaces is going to be out of focus, and as such it can reduce overall contrast and maybe add some veiling glare in harsh light, but those are subtle problems.
Now, having said all of that there's another relevant side to this...the sensor. Even though dust within the lens is not a real problem, dust on the image sensor is. I remember holding my eye up to the back of the EF 24-105/4L at one point and rapidly zooming from tele to wide, and the blowback coming out of the lens made me blink. So to the extent that there's dust in the rear cavity of the lens, i.e. behind the rear element, an extending zoom mechanism can force that dust back toward the sensor. It was less of a problem with a DSLR, since zooming during exposure is not normal and the mirror is there the rest of the time. But with a MILC (or a DLSR in live view), composition is done with the sensor exposed and an extending zoom will have a tendency to push more dust onto the sensor.
Sensor dust is really an unavoidable problem anyway, and IMO the best way to deal with it is to be comfortable cleaning your own sensor or be prepared to send your camera in for frequent cleanings. Personally, I take the former approach (Visible Dust Arctic Butterfly and Sensor Loupe; I have sensor stamps and a LensPen SensorKlear just in case, but so far I've only needed the Arctic Butterfly to do the job). Speaking of which, my R8 needs a cleaning thanks to several lens changes while hiking on Mount Etna in Sicily, with lots of volcanic dust kicked up by fellow hikers.