Uh, Cynthetiq, that paper you linked to was rejected from the journal it was submitted to. The guy who wrote it is a charlatan.
If you guys are going to try to cite "studies" to support your desire to ignore the science, at least cite ones that don't get rejected.
And you might notice that both Marc Morano and Michael Asher are not exactly unbiased sources of information on this subject, since they both are desperate to ignore the fact that the paper was rejected.
Critical thinking, anybody?
We can call this the "some guy said on the web" argument against global warming.
It's a fun argument, because you can use it to prove whatever you want.
For example, look, here's a list of scientists who doubt the truth of evolution:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home...os/#presentsci
And if you look around a bit, you'll see that the "here's a list of scientists" argument can be used to prove a lot of very interesting things, for example: HIV doesn't exist, the Holocaust never happened, the world is 6000 years old and created in 7 days.
So guys, if you're going to be consistent, if you're going to deny global warming on that basis, then I'm afraid that commits you to accepting every crackpot idea that a "list of scientists" or "some guy on the web" ever endorsed.
Or, maybe you should consider the possibility that you are more interested in confirming your biases than learning any science?