The sad thing is that absurd arguments work. All that's needed for denialism to win is doubt. Just one goof, or bad actor, or wrong result can be spun like this into a "collapse" of the case it is making.

The fact that this is an argument of risk, where the argument for carbon legislation needs to be weighed not against the certainty of the science but on the best-guess risks of inaction is completely lost on the public and the media.