I think the point that the person you are responding to was trying to make is different - there is no way to actually test any of this, so it could just be all bullshit and no one could really tell.
To which my counterpoint was that it’s not fair to expect people without the training to look at it and realize it’s not bullshit, and to realize they tested and proved the point they made in the paper.
The conversation becomes something about what people can talk about, but not the math in the paper, or the supporting documentation or familiarity with the literature.
