This is about as knee-slappingly insightful as a Japanese person saying "Trust Paul Graham on startups? Pfft. What would Americans ever accomplish with a startup, invading somebody?"
They are from maritime research, and they compared computer modeling of climate changes to astrology, so the step to reading guts of whales doesn't seem so far fetched to me. Japan is famous for needing whales for scientific research, so I just put 2+2 together.
I must admit I missed all pages of the article after the first, though (bloody pagination). Now reading, I can at least sympathize with the notion that man made global warming is only a hypothesis. However, that holds for anything science says, doesn't it? There are still varying degrees of belief based on the known evidence.
Overall the whole article did not have much content, or did it? The only content is basically that there are 3 japanese scientists who don't believe in global warming and 2 who do (or something like that - in any case the real information content is close to zero).