I can't recall Professor Cordain ever getting embroiled in online rows.
What Cordain has done is leave a body of serious and sustained research covering something like a quarter of a century now.
Now I think paleo tends to be "oversold" (I don't mean that necessarily in an economic sense). In truth the diet isn't that different to a number of others. (Just as an example look at the lists of foods allowed and not allowed in the Specific Carbohydrate Diet, which goes back over half a century now. Not identical but not a mile away either.) Neither is the approach unique -- Taubes mentions a physician taking himself off down the city museum and asking what prehistoric man ate way back (round about 1910, IIRC). Stefansson was even more interested in the remote past and was a trained anthropologist to boot. And Dr. Eades probably knows more about the anthropological and prehistoric evidence than almost anyone in paleo -- he's been going to conferences on forensic anthropology and that kind of thing for years.
I think both the importance and the uniqueness of the diet are oversold. Nevertheless, when all's said it done it probably just about edges out most other approaches and, as I say, represents something like 25 years of sustained research. That must amount to thousands of hours of work. In detail there's a lot there. He's added concerns about vitamin D; there's a long-standing interest in essential fatty acids; he's been involved in studies looking at macro-nutrient ratios:
Estimated macronutrient and fatty acid intakes fro... [Br J Nutr. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI
... and the list goes on.
Would I eat exactly as he says? Not necessarily. I think, for example, someone with diabetes would be well advised to give an ear to the low carb people, too, and would not want to eat at the macronutrient ratio given in the paper above. But I certainly prefer him to the angry bloggers.