Comment by moralestapia

The wording implies that Aaronson does not know what he's talking about.

>If you want to learn about actual Busy Beaver results [...]

This is saying there is no discussion of the results in the article, which is not true.

>Unlike Aaronson, he actually is on the forefront of Busy Beaver research [...]

This implies Aaronson has no (or lesser) authority on the subject and suggests we should listen to somebody else who purportedly has more.

Nowhere in @NooneAtAll3's comment is there an argument made against/for the contents of the article, an example of that would be:

"Aaronson mentions X but this is not correct because Y" or something along those lines.

Instead, the comment, in it's full extent, is either discrediting (perhaps unintentionally) and/or appealing to the authority of people involved. That's ad hominem.