Thanks for the thoughtful reply, it's cool that you're open to being proven wrong, and I appreciate the no-rush vibe. That said, the "watch his entire oeuvre first" approach still feels like shifting the burden:
I don't want a young one like you to jump to conclusions that people as old & biased as me reach merely coz we've been around.
That's the reason I want you to parse thru his entire ouevre running a fine hair comb through all his analyses before you reach an informed decision & pronounce like Yamraj does on whether that eminent historian is guilty as I hold him to be .
if the claims (especially heavy ones like him being a "Han con man" or having CCP/MSS connections) are based on real issues in his content, there should be specific examples, clips, timestamps, or patterns you can point to right now without me having to marathon everything.
Once again why would I colour your opinions with my lens ? You seem the intelligent kind . Someone who doesn't take things for granted & demands evidence . Had you been blessed with lesser IQ , I would have definitely consider your request & complied with it .
Since you're obviously the intelligent & perceptive kind you should be able to reach your own decision which would be independent devoid of any perception bias based on an informed analyses of his entire content for one can't base ones judgement on a podcast here or there or even on certain opinions expressed in a podcast .
That wouldn't give you a holistic picture of what that eminent historian stands for or his views or even his world view. After all one swallow does not a summer make !
If the "con man" or operative angle comes from a particular video where he lies, pushes verifiable BS, hides affiliations, or something else concrete, just drop that one example (link/timestamp/quote).
Answered this one above.
We can zero in on it, fact-check together, and actually "discuss threadbare" like you suggested. Otherwise, it risks coming across as guilt-by-background suspicion rather than evidence-based critique.
Once again I reiterate the need for you to reach an independent conclusion . I mean why would you want me to spoon feed you . That's what less intelligent & lazy folk do .
Genuinely curious what flipped the switch for you cause you are starting to seem like someone who makes absurd claims who can't back it up the moment he starts getting questioned about said claims, hit me with it when you can.
I'm old . Old people don't need a reason to hate on someone . They just diss a person because they can . It's the young who ought to take the lead & debunk all such silly notions the old have.
American Indians used to follow a simple principle when raising their kids . They let the toddler explore everything in their environment & wouldn't interfere unless there was a genuine threat to the kid's life.
For example if there was a fire burning & the kid crawled to it & stuck his hand in the fire , that kids folks didn't ever stop the kid. The child then would learn to respect fire & never ever forget the incident for the rest of his life . Ditto for whenever the kid saw an animal & decided to stick his finger into the animal's rear .
Since my folks didn't bring me that way I'm all the poorer as far as understanding first principles go . I don't want you & other youngsters as intelligent perceptive & sensitive as you to have that kind of sheltered life.
