I don't ascribe to the theory that if you once worked for an oil or gas company then, ipso facto, your subsequent points of view are necessarily invalid. Sometimes ad hominem attacks add weight to an argument, most of the time they indicate a weak rhetorical position--this appears to be the case with your argument.

Did you even read the article? I'd actually be interested in discussing legitimate critiques of Lindzen's argument, but what you've put forward so far isn't that compelling; rather, as arguments go it is impotent and lame.

WW