If you want more absurdity, consider the tendency by some to find more fault with my lack of referencing links to some of the material I debunk, than with the “elephant in the room”—the ignorance and stupidity of the debunked content, often their own. This tells you more than anything you need to know about the state of knowledge and intelligence in the industry, and what american culture produces these days.

Well, there is a double reason I have not always referenced links. First, if you know how “link popularity” works, I saw no reason to contribute to that misleading measure—why should I help make something I prove wrong, popular? And second, why should I make such material easier to access?

The fact is I do quote what I debunk, including the names or aliases of the authors (if they are not too cowardly and remain anonymous). If there is a title (some group threads don’t carry any), I reference it. And I always keep the links; if anybody seriously questions the sources, all they gotta do is ask me about it. But, of course, that would hardly serve their purpose.

As I noted in the past, what does one do if and when faced with criticism whose substance one does not comprehend, and is incapable of rebutting, and which exposes one’s incompetence? Well, the only thing one can do is insult, question motives, criticize style, simply declare that one was “misinterpreted”, or “plagiarized” without any proof, and so on, often without realizing how well one proves the points of my debunking. What is more, one digresses to questioning the lack of reference even of a link to a thread that oneself has participated in, and therefore knows it to be genuine. To see how that works, check out my When “Fowl” Is All They’ve Got, then the “reaction” to it. What better example of Orwellian NewSpeak: ignorance is knowledge, and knowledge is ignorance. I dare you find one iota of substance in the whole thread, yet this does not stop anybody from declaring me “without substance”. No, it’s not 1984—welcome to America 2005, where the ability to reason is nil, and you can watch the sad consequences as they occur.

How come I referenced the links this time? Well, you see, recently I came across a Google new feature that tries to address the link popularity flaw. It’s a minor hassle, and I am not sure how effective it is yet, but I will try it for a while, just so the “unskilled and unaware of it” don’t have at least this excuse to distract from the elephant in the room.

Posted 9/30/05