It's been posted.
Since you seem to want to offer some opposing science as to that validated by Scientists, Universities, the IPCC and of course the innovator himself, I suggest you rebut it by providing the proven science that does negate it and the studies that do. You wouldn't need the article to do that.
I can't debate science research. I'm not a bio-scientist. I can only go by what I accept as shown by leading authorities in articles researching it.
So again, if you believe the science to support the evidence that the BCEES method is based upon junk science, i'll be to glad to listen.
But know, I trust professionals and articles naming them.
Less reliance on opinions . The article was not an opinion. It was based upon thorough, unbiased research.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
