The "shallow dismissal" rule is based on the assumption that everyone is acting in good faith. When some posts their latest weekend project with their Raspberry Pi, that's a fair assumption. When someone who's worked for the White House is publishing a climate change denial paper with the funding of the oil and gas industry and the Koch brothers, good faith is no longer a rational assumption. They may of course still be genuine in the end, but the first task is to establish signs of good faith before immediately assuming the argument is intended to be serious. It does no benefit to discourse to seriously engage with people who aren't trying to play the game by the rules in the first place.

Every scientist is getting paid.

Agreed, but the original argument was also not meaningful. The credentials are not useful.

You should report it to the mods and ask if they agree.