This isn't some crackpot questioning the scientific consensus of an entire field of study. It's a critique of specific contents of a single piece of work. Give

This isn't some crackpot questioning the scientific consensus of an entire field of study. It's a critique of specific contents of a single piece of work. Given that pop sci publications have a history of being slippery with the truth, and given the financial incentive to make millions off a pop sci book, and given that the claims made in the blog post are easily confirmed and checked, this appeal to authority that you've made is misplaced.