That article references Sourcewatch, which is as useless as Wikipedia:

Sourcewatch Profile (Discover the Networks)

"SourceWatch seeks to expose what it calls the “propaganda activities of public relations firms” and the activities of organizations working “on behalf of corporations, governments and special interests.” These "exposes," which tend to be critical of their subjects, deal predominantly with conservative entities...

...The perspectives are mostly leftist; the entries rely heavily on leftist and far-leftist sources."

Center for Media & Democracy (Sourcewatch) (ActivistCash.org)
Smearing Conservative Writers (The Conservative Voice)

Unlike Al Gore, B.A. Government (no higher degree achieved, no science degree), Milloy has legitimate Science Degrees - Steve Milloy, B.A. Natural Sciences, M.S. Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins University.

That article if you actually read it makes no sense what so ever it even states "Much of what he calls Junk Science isn't science at all." - Um no kidding, that is the point of his page. This is one of the worst articles I have read. They are arguing that what Milloy calls Junk Science is not science at all which is what Milloy is stating by calling it Junk Science! They then complain that Milloy does not list a certain Quack Dentist? What does that prove? Is Milloy required to list everything on his page to satisfy the ones he does list as Junk Science? They then complain that since Milloy responded to an article as speculation because it provided no evidence for it's claims, according to them Milloy should have really said "This topic is worthy of further scientifics investigation!" Uh-huh, so now Milloy is required to be positive and endorse any study that provides no evidence for it's claims? Is this guy insane?

The article then makes bold statements about "misinformation", "misleading claims" and "propaganda" but does not provide one piece of evidence to support these statements. A worthless article.

I suggest actually reading these articles instead of simply using google to try and find something that contradicts something.

The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource

Science is science, on this we should be able to agree.  Then there is junk science.  The term, junk science, is used for any science that doesn't adhere to scientific methods, submit it's results for review, and has been proven to falsify it's information. 

The Global Warming crowd has done all of the above, and more.  Mr. Malloy also attacks the DDT fiasco, that took place from the 1960's until now, as is just now being disproven by facts, rather than feelings.

The bottom line is that Mr. Malloy may not be a scientist, but then neither is Al Gore. The difference is one, with his falsehoods, is going to cost you (and me as a consequence) a ton of money, with no results.  Mr. Malloy will cost you nothing.   

Never argue with an idiot.  They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Does that make you a neocon /ExxonMobil shill?

Feeling left out? Want us to walk you through how to put in a following cutsie motto. 

BTW Your friends do make lots of money through AGW.

And their science isn't very impressive.

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

So you don't work? 

I say you DO have a funding source.  Why can't I question your funding source?  Or those of the scientists who buy into man-made global warming as religiously as you do?

"Look! No little cutsie motto or crazy veiled statement at the end of my posting."  Jealousy will get you nowhere.  Don't blame me because you have zero creativity or wit. (Vitriol is no substitute for wit, either.)   

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.