You seem to be completely ignoring the words “self-published”, and the followup comment re-emphasizing how that’s critically relevant in case you missed it. Yo

You seem to be completely ignoring the words “self-published”, and the followup comment re-emphasizing how that’s critically relevant in case you missed it. You also seem to be ignoring where I’m very careful not to discredit the author or the work, saying that neither his source of income or mode of publication speaks authoritatively against the actual veracity or quality of the work, and that they are simply things to be aware of as one personally interpret the work. Since I agree with you, I’m happy to hack at the strawman with you (“expertise comes in many forms and shouldn’t be rejected simply because there are other incentives involved!”), but it really just doesn’t feel like you’ve been engaging with what’s actually in the text as written.