> none of his articles have citations They don't have page-level citations, but do note which books any given post is based on. The author is documenting thei

> none of his articles have citations They don't have page-level citations, but do note which books any given post is based on. The author is documenting their attempts to learn about the world. That means that yes, they don't know things about something, and sometimes get things wrong in the process. But my point is that they are not claiming that things are "fine", which is the point you are avoiding. They don't think crop rotation is "advanced" per se, but talk about the fact that there are different rotation techniques, some of which are more recently developed than others. The very article you cite says "The early stages were all about crop rotation", which is in violent agreement with you. This specific article you mention also clearly says which book it's based on. > and the only argument you have in their defense is that they did not mean the words they wrote I have never said this, and at this point I just feel like we're talking past each other for some reason I can't figure out. We could probably get this sorted out in a more synchronous setting where we could do a bunch of back-and-forth to establish points of agreement and work out from there, but I have lost hope of us having a productive conversation in the Hacker News comment format on this topic... If you _are_ interested in getting to the bottom of our disagreements here, I would be happy to try to figure out some synchronous way of doing it. Please let me know.