A quick glance at that article seems its just whats called the Paleo Strawman: it talks about the Paleo name (and how it is connected to the Paleolithic era), but doesn't actually discuss the diet at all and just says "oh, Paleo is wrong because eating what we ate over 10 thousand years ago isn't appropriate for us today", even though the Paleo diet does not say that.
The Paleo diet is about reducing inflammation, reducing toxins, and reducing anti-nutrients. The majority of the three of those comes from refined sugars, grains, seed oils, and legumes. What it DOESN'T do is blindly say "oh, our pre-agricultural ancestors ate that so it must be the best thing ever" because that has no place in Paleo as it is not scientific.
The article proves that Karl S. Kruszelnicki (I've never heard of him before) has no interest in doing research into what he is writing about, because he does not mention any of what I just said in his article.
