Exactly for AGW. Explicitly and repeatedly. And absurdly. Nope. That's you strawmanning - (you decide to create a model of your own, omit the equilibrium calculations and so forth, make convenient assumptions, and come to an irrelevant conclusion about something else.) You never did address the paper, except to simply deny its analysis and findings. So add it to the list - although not as absurd as AGW denial or Jim Crow denial, because you are not denying simple observable facts and research findings obvious to anyone who looks, as you are with them.