I read the entire paper a couple of days ago and have done a lot of work to critique it because I think it is flawed in several ways. Ironically, this AI summary is actually quite accurate. You're getting down voted because posting AI output is not condoned, but that doesn't mean that in this case it is not correct.

They're getting downvoted because without even taking a look at the paper, they felt that "please create a summary of the stupid, bad faith, idiot, fake science paper" is a reasonable way to ask for a summary.