It looks like Tol has joined the <cough> illustrious <cough> ranks of those who publish their review comments:
the commentary could be made substantially more balanced and contemplative – for example, as proof of “truth” the author cites himself and a series of mostly social media sources, with little reference to the academic literature and with little evidence of neutrality in his selection of “evidence”. There is a more unfortunate and confrontational aspect to the tone of this submission when the author makes his final unsubstantiated reflections… [not] original, nor to be of sufficient breadth or disinterested reflection to contribute to the literature, or to knowledge.
No, I haven’t read it. Of course not, why would I?
[Update: at one point I added some witty cartoons to this post. Whilst the cartoons were indeed very witty – and if you insist, for transparency, are available at this archived version – I don’t think they’re appropriate for this post -W]