Read the comments at your link on Casey. Appears they are more pro Casey and are critical of the pdf article.
Okay, a father and son support Casey. Casey, in turn, has posted nice things on the son's blog. Yawn.
No one else posts anything, aside from a two line response by the blog owner and it's hardly supportive. No offense, but that's hardly overwhelming support.
Look, I happen to agree with Casey's arguments. Well, maybe not agree, but I consider them plausible, which is more than I can say about AGW theory.
I find Casey's press release where he's informed the White House, etc. of the findings of his "scientists" to be obnoxious, pretentious, and a rather complete turn-off. It's almost like something Leo-the-lame-brained-DiCaprio or Tim Robbins or George Clooney would issue, but without the celebrity.
If he would just try to inform without trying to pretend he's the head of some big think tank (and please donate) and someone with some kind of relationship with the country's political leaders, he would come across a lot better.
This is a classic case of the style of the communicator getting in the way of the message. He does not appear credible, which tarnishes his message. As one who would like to see more people consider the solar cycle theory, I find him irritating.
Given the responses on this thread, I think I've got company.