Before revision:  I have had a close look at their data and their report, and I find that both the data itself, the method of presentation of the data to the human raters, and the analysis of agreement statistics are problematic. I think that data used to address this important question should be very high quality, and the method of presentation of the data should be optimized. Alternatively, the title should be changed to : "Is human classification by experienced untrained observers a gold standard in fixation detection when data quality is very poor  ?" Numerous examples of various types of low quality data are presented herein.
After revision:  If they had entitled their paper : "Is human classification by experienced untrained observers a gold standard in fixation detection when data quality is very poor ?" Numerous examples of various types of low quality data are presented herein.