So, to paraphrase, you are asking "I know how to read science papers, so should I base my stance on the preeminent issue of the day on an article in (an admittedly) reactionary newspaper?". (I pose the paraphrase in the best tradition of answering the question you wish you were asked, rather than the one that is actually asked).
OK. Well, I'm not a climate scientist, but I am an atmospheric scientist, and the answer to your question is: For the love of God man, what are you thinking? Did you think about the question before you posted it? I haven't read the article and I don't intend to. I can't imagine a more pure waste of time than trying to get educated on a science issue by reading a newspaper.
The more polite version of my answer is that if you want to get some measure of the science on climate change you'd better start reading review articles in the literature. They're not that hard to read, especially if you've got a career wading through papers in some other discipline. If you really want to start off with some light reading there are some easily digested summaries is things like EOS Transactions and such. I'd link all these nice things, but it's kinda pointless, you only have free access to the things you need if you have access to online journals via your school libraries and such.