I don't find this critique particular compelling, but I do hope some illumination is thrown on what is clearly a vehemently held view.
Please expand.
Gee, if only it was possible for people to try and replicate results, peer review the paper, and publish a counter-study.
Why would you react like this?
It seems like one of those phenomena we all intuitively know to be true, and they've tried to capture this as best they could with the method described.