I completely disagree. Based off of your comment it seems that you did not absorb the article whatsoever.

There are many good examples in the article of Peterson presenting opinion as indisputable fact and obscuring ideas with complex language. Particularly when he is challenged based on those ideas.

Not to mention the examples of how he treats children and others. It is an absolutely wild read. Lengthy but eye-opening.

Edit: it also exposes how the ideas that his core philosophy is built on are simplistic at best and often flat out wrong or intentionally disingenuous.