No one's being "demeaned". I think part of the problem is when members come in and post their theories and ideas that severely deviate from accepted scholarship, that's all they do! "This is what I think and why I think it" and then can't back it up! That's not scholarship, that's tabloidesque.
Until the conspiracy enthusiasts get fluent in Russian and German and go research in the original documents (such as what Wilson and King did, and whose scholarship I for one consider the most current and most accurate) or discover something previously overlooked, you *cannot* speak with authority, and neither can you pull anything from Razdinsky, McNeal, and the others and expect to convince anyone.
The kind of research I'm talking about is the province of historians who have been trained to the profession. There is nothing wrong with being a hobbyist and even making grand speculations -- that can actually be a lot of fun -- but it's not serious! If you post *demanding* to be taking seriously you better have something more to back it up, or at least understand that you're going to receive major opposition and not whine about it!
