I haven't read this whole thing but by just by skimming it I find all the usual denialist BS with some engineer hubris mixed in. There's the claim that CO2 isn

I haven't read this whole thing but by just by skimming it I find all the usual denialist BS with some engineer hubris mixed in. There's the claim that CO2 isn't bad, it's needed for life. This is a common among denialists, ignoring the fact that lots of things which are needed for life are also unhealthy in large quantities. There's the claim that far back in the earths history CO2 levels were higher, ignoring the fact that the speed with which we are altering these levels is what's unprecedented. There's the claim that CO2 is such a small part of the atmosphere's composition that we have no need to worry, which I find hilarious because he's not an expert in atmospheric composition but the scientists he's trying to refute are. The whole "those silly scientists don't know how to interpret data" thing is a new spin on it though.