"There is no way now that the electron can move, so there is no electron conduction current through the capacitor. Here something very primitive happens. These electrons induce a positive charge onto the other side of the capacitor or they push the electrons on the other side of the capacitor plates away from them and pull the positive charges towards them such that opposite chargers are induced on either side of electron."
I think this shows how little most understand about electricity and electric fields.
First, in a metal conductor only the negatively charged free electrons are mobile.
...
Science has never said otherwise, since "electron conduction current" in the quote in bold is the current of free electrons in the conductor, yet it should be understood.
Thanks to AC, have we just learned that H+ ions do not move in an electrolyzed solution towards the negative electrode? Have we just learned that plasmas do not contain moving positive charges? Have we just learned that protons cannot be accelerated in a current by an electric field or deflected by a magnetic field, so that the LHC does not exist?
Of course, currents of positive charges also exist. And not only can it exist, but also a current of negative charges is equivalent to a current of positive charges in the opposite direction.
Neutral matter has as many positive as negative charges. It is therefore understood that a deficit of electrons allows the positive charges of the matter to be revealed, and that the displacement of this electron deficit is equivalent to a positive charge moving. The effects are the same, and this effect is the electric current.
The electron carries a charge, but a hole in a semiconductor also carries a charge and this one is positive. To say that the electron IS a charge is only a convenient shortcut. The electron carries a charge, but it is also a mass or a momentum.
So when we talk about charges, we must understand that we are talking about coulombs, and that the electron is only a particular case of charge carrier to which the notion of current is not reduced. Coulombs/seconds are an electric current no matter which particles give rise to it or how they do so.
A flow of electrons is an electric current, but an electric current is not a flow of electrons, this is the confusion that Amasci and AC make but not the scientists who already understood it in the 19th century. It turns out that the scientists were clever enough to assume that the direction of the current was that of the positive charge carriers. So the negative electrons move in the opposite direction of the current. All this is a pure convention, a secondary detail of no real interest, a choice, and certainly not an error.
As for the "induction" that everyone understands, it is still necessary to distinguish that of the coulombic influence at a distance between plates of a capacitor, perfectly expressed in the above quotation, from the induction by a variable current, even if in the second case it is also a result of the coulombic influence.
The interest of science is that it knows how to extract the general principles and formalise the laws of physics, going from the particular to the general, whereas Amasci does the exact opposite: reducing the electric current to particular cases, as we see here with the electron.
Beware of the pseudo-scientific discourse and images for the intellectually deficient that one finds on Amasci, which are to electromagnetism what the phlogiston of the XVIIth century is to thermodynamics: a ludicrous gibberish. If at the time it was still excusable, because science was only in its infancy, today it is no longer, it is disinformation and a return to obscurantism. The same people who would not even know the existence of the electron if scientists had not taught them, William Beaty included, claim to be teaching them what a charge or a current is, when it is clear that they have only a partial and regressive view of it and that nothing they know about it comes from logical and intelligible reasoning based on their own measurements, and which their formulation would allow to be verified quantitatively. If I asked them to prove to me that the electron exists and how much its charge is, these jackasses would be very annoyed, but not Millikan.