As an example lets pretend a majority of reports say a vehicle is moving forward and going to hit someone but the reports differ on the speed. Someone puts out a video with the vehicle moving backwards and an object in the video falling upwards. The correct response is you don't say "ha! all the reports are wrong, no one will be hit" because of the video. Even when a report says the vehicle is moving slightly to the left when moving forward is contradicted by a report saying the vehicle is moving to the right while going forward does not mean you dismiss both reports and assume that the vehicle is moving backwards or stopped.

If you don't want to expend the effort to evaluate the reports within the context of the greater body of work yourself that's fine (and absolutely sane) what's not a great idea is then going on to ignore the majority of experts on the subject saying this is happening and it is a problem.

Also your citation is poor. It's from someone who doesn't even understand partial pressures of gas (as evidinced by his claims CO2 participates out of the air in Antartica! He even sticks to that claim after having multiple people (including climate change skeptics) try to explain this basic principle to him) and a quick google search shows actual analysis on many of his other claims and debunks them.