[sethrin]

It's intended to seem like a serious critique of AGW, while not actually having any factual value. It's more effective the less familiar you are with science; if your understanding of the subject ends with the authorities claimed by the persons involved then it may be as strong an argument as you need. You may also note that the articles the author lists in support of the "diversity of opinion" on this matter are not academic sources, and puzzlingly, one of the few serious works explicitly endorses the "consensus ... that increasing carbon dioxide will lead to a warmer earth with a different distribution of climatic regimes."

The source and person who posted it are unserious and should be disregarded.