Actually his answer was that he is familiar with several independent reconstructions and that they suffer from similarly problematic flaws, not that he is not "

Actually his answer was that he is familiar with several independent reconstructions and that they suffer from similarly problematic flaws, not that he is not "interested in the answer". Your second paragraph is an ad hominem, where you make various assumptions about the OP. Yet there is still not a single coherent argument why the OP was actually wrong.