I see nothing to suggest that that effect is not simply the effect of stronger NR being used to counteract the 7D's slightly higher image noise (to be expected from a smaller sensor) and the fact that the 7D image is viewed at a significantly higher magnification, for whatever reason. Either way, let's not forget that these are JPEGs. This comparison says more about Canon's jpeg engines than it does about the sensor output.
Beyond that, you're comparing two same-generation sensors with different sizes. Of course the larger sensor is going to have better imaging characteristics; it's enlarged less for the same output size. The claim many are making here is that the 7D/T2i's higher pixel density will give it worse imaging characteristics than previous-gen sensors with lower pixel density. This is quite simply not true, as can be seen by comparing files at equal output sizes. The comparison you have posted just isn't really relevant.
Also, for what it's worth, the sensor with the most "CRIPPLED tonality, a sense of "dryness/opaqueness", visible loss of "shine-factor" and and overall "recessed" tonality and color density" in its RAW files that I've ever used was the 40D. The best, in that sense, was the higher-density Pentax K20D, and the Pentax K-x interestingly falls somewhere between the two. Not a big deal to me, RAW files aren't supposed to look vivid, and proper processing can get excellent, satisfying images out of any of these sensors. What the initial RAW files look like is not terribly important, I don't know anyone who shoots RAW and then posts unchanged default jpeg conversions. The final jpegs (or prints) that result from the RAW file as interpreted by the artist are what truly matters.