If the data was truly in dispute, it might be a worthwhile debate, but this paper is published by two people that have never published in the field before, and

If the data was truly in dispute, it might be a worthwhile debate, but this paper is published by two people that have never published in the field before, and it's riddled with obvious and blatant errors. The fundamental claim, that there was no excess mortality in 2020, is clearly wrong. This is nothing that is worthy of having a debate over - it's just disinformation spam. It would be like replying to every piece of spam email you receive.