That has got to be one of the most shocking displays of intellectual arrogance I have ever witnessed. You claim that your expertise in a field in which you admit you are self-trained, an amateur with heavy ideological baggage, is so complete and authoritative that you simply need not consider anyone else's opinions on the subject, even though your prejudices were already formed prior to your research. And this in a field which is politically sensitive and highly controversial, and which many contradictory opinions and debate from recognized authorities can be found. You simply write it all off as irrelevant. You don't even acknowledge the role an investigator's ideology might have on his interpretation. If anyone disagrees with you he is obviously biased. Because you have 30 years of study. Shock and awe.

Even the standard historian's caveat that all historiography is written by the victors, and that every age and every viewpoint casts its own spin and interpretation on events, does not slow down the great TB. What the hell do they know? You had it figured out before you even showed up. "My way or the highway" indeed.

You're a fraud, TB, underneath all the research is simply the formula: "I know I'm right so I just have to find the information that will prove it." And guess what, you always find it. Every single time. Not once have you been wrong. The prevailing wisdom is not only to be challenged, it should never even have been considered in the first place.

Your opinions on history, politics and economics are as convincing as your conclusions on climatology. Anything that conflicts with your world-view must either be mistaken, or propaganda from your enemies and talking to you is like trying to reason with a creationist.