I think the author meant that "profound" is something that takes a lot of thought to understand, whereas "bullshit" is something that has no meaning.If you find a profound meaning in it, you're "bullshit-insensitive".
While the second sentence isn't very profound, it does have a meaning and it's used as an example because most people will understand it.
A statement can take a lot of thinking to understand because it's carrying some deep truth for which we lack natural insight- or, just because it has no meaning and therefore cannot be understood.
I've heard many different variations of the second sentence, from many different people but, again, popular opinion about what constitutes bullshit or not is not a very objective criterion.
I mean more that the paper compares meaningless statements with difficult but meaningful statements. Rather than the common term of "bullshit" meaning lies or something disagreeable.
The author probably should have defined "bullshit" more accurately, but the paper seems to be purposely abstruse.
While the second sentence isn't very profound, it does have a meaning and it's used as an example because most people will understand it.