From the link you referred to.
Here.
I think this is the key paragraph.
Hartnett makes numerous erroneous statements on properties of PSD, suggesting he is relying on his 'intuition' on how the PSD works instead of actually testing the claim. Most researchers, myself included, must demonstrate that our test protocols work for datasets of known content before making such grandiose claims when applying the test to datasets of unknown content. In the abstract for Paper I, Hartnett states that his results "indicate that this is a real effect and not some observational artifact." Yet he has apparently conducted no tests to determine which characteristics of his results are analysis artifacts.
Typical creationist, using "intuition" instead of actually testing. Sure doesnt sound like the scientific method does it.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts