Could this study "totally dismantle" Global Warming claims? Could this study "totally dismantle" Global Warming claims?

That's the assertion made in the article ‘Bombshell’ climate-change study could totally dismantle the claim humans are causing global warming.  Quoting from the study:


  "The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data
  sets are not a valid representation of reality,” the authors wrote.
  “In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that
  removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent
  with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it
  is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that
  recent years have been the warmest ever — despite current claims of
  record setting warming."


On reading that article I noticed that they name but do not link to the article nor it's publisher. I was able to find it here: On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data &amp; The Validity of EPA’s CO2 Endangerment Finding (pdf), but that's on a Wordpress site, not a credible scientific journal, as far as I can tell.  Further googling only turned up more references in political-influence sources like TheBlaze.com.

The one place that may be presenting as something that they published is the Heartland Institute (here), but I cannot tell if they are legit or not.

There is no publication information in the paper itself, nor any evidence of formal "peer-review" other than the list of scientists(?) on page 2 who affirm that they agree with the conclusions (which is not my understanding of what peer-review means nor of how it works).

I also have some trouble following the reasoning of their findings and conclusions, which seems like a bit of a logical leap.

So, my questions are:


Is this a legitimate peer-reviewed scientific paper as they claimed
How legitimate/credible is their methodology?
How legitimate/credible are their findings?  And is this really something new?
Is it published anywhere, and has there been any open scientific review, critique or commentary of it?
Does this paper really represent a credible threat to current climate change theories?
There is several credibility problems with this work.

First, they mention after the title: 


  Abridged Research Report


but I cannot find any related full work from the authors on the matter. As a comparison, in this case, a short, simplified article was prepared as a companion for a full paper. The former is useful for news agencies and general public, and the latter for interested peers.

Second, references are poor. Data sources are cited, from government or agencies FTP sites, which is probably legit (I did not verify the linked data in great detail). GAST dataset are publicly available, as the freedom to publish possible misinterpretation in a proper peer reviewed journal, which remain to be done for the authors actual work.

Third, there is no real methodology. The abridged paper is presenting results and interpretations, but there is no real method.

Fourth, p17


  Clearly the historical GAST data adjustments that have been made have been dramatic and invariably have been favorable to Climate Alarmists’ views regarding Global Warming


This type of statement is having no place in a scientific paper, as this is poorly opinionated based on nothing of substance (Clearly, dramatic, Climate Alarmist) and does not prove much, except that the contribution is not scientific.

Fifth of less importance. the formatting is very poor, which is not helping with the credibility of authors - not that it is very hard to prepare nice and efficient looking reports these days. In a few words, poor communication (in this case, this paper) is not helpful to convince colleagues of alternative ideas (or any ideas).

Sixth until this work reach the stage of being published by an independent peer reviewed medium, I don't see how this could even begin to be a 'threat' to current climate science.