was that the article in question was published in a peer-reviewed academic journal. That is the only thing I said. I made no value judgment in support of or in opposition to the argument itself and that should be abundantly clear. For reasons why I take peer-reviewed science to represent something of value, see my post #10.

Questioning peer-reviewed science simply because it does not conform to your own idelogical predispositions is what climate-change deniers do.

That is the sum total of my earlier post.