It was neither abuse nor groundless. I stated the reasons why what he said is ridiculous.
If you think otherwise, why don't you give reasons why you think what he says is sensible - provide some evidence and make sure it is very solid. He's made some extraordinary claims and that requires extraordinary evidence if it is to be accepted.
BTW - I haven't ridiculed the man as a whole, only what he said about climate science. The chap has had some successes in business from what I read and I would expect in other aspects of his life he has also had some worthy achievements.
(If you read what I wrote earlier you'll see that I pointed out he's been successful in business and is not dumb. It was another poster who suggested he was 'too dumb'.)
