TrueTomHarley

This reminds me of a scene from Tom Irregardless and Me in which I bring my Bible Student Ted Putsch along on my return visit with Bernard Strawman and the two can’t stand one another. “It couldn’t be simpler!” Ted all but shouts at the pompous fellow, “or is that what is the problem with you?!”
This is not to say that JWI is like Bernard, only that there is almost hostility from Ted, who is ‘zealous for God.’ (I suspect Bro Rando is something like Ted.)  I’ll come to JWI’s defense, even as I say I think he’s off-base and if he should get into hot water over it, I will say ‘it’s on him.’ I’ll do it because I like both you guys, Thinking and him
As best as I can tell, he’s indulging a hobby, the same as everyone else here is. It’s a pastime, same as it is for others. I suppose answering him with rancor is also a pastime, if you get worked up over what he says. You should do it. Why not? It’s not as though I am exactly nice to certain other ones on this forum.
He doesn’t bring it into the Kingdom Hall. He also has no problem with the notion of humans taking the lead. As far as I can see, he teaches what Witnesses teach, with the caveat now and then of saying that ‘this is our present understanding,’ instead of ‘this is the way it is!!’ I don’t have a problem with him. He’s on a tiny internet backwater forum regularly followed by (as he said, and from all appearances it seems to be so) 6 six heroes and 6 villains. Perhaps there are that many again who follow along, but beyond that, I doubt there is any audience beyond the fluke visitor now and then. Of course, once you put something on the internet, ‘it stays there forever!!!’ but it is also immediately buried, and not so easily found even by one searching for it. Not a problem for me. It is when he publishes a book of separatism like Rulf that I’ll leave him to twist in the wind.
He’s indulging a pastime, laying his opinions out with as much support as he can muster, maybe even imagining someone in high places will pick up and mull over it. Everyone here is indulging a pastime. No one, even of the good guys, is a stereotypical Witness. One thing he doesn’t do is link to his own website, as several here do, including myself. Some are going into overdrive on it, Bro Rando and the woman from the hills, I think. PSomH thinks I am here to promote my books. Of course I am in part, but if I really was, believe me, it would be much more in-your-face than the occasional references that I make. 
As an example, here I have received my author’s copy of I Don’t Know Why We Persecute Jehovah’s Witnesses: Searching for the Why. Even after numerous proofs, some by self and some by others, when I see it in print, I immediately make about 200 corrections! Whoa! do I appreciate the advantage of a publisher who edits! None of the corrections are major at this point, nor even typos per say, but small glitches that make for reading not so smooth as could be. Once I upload the amended version, finally finally finally a print book is good to go on Amazon. And then I’ll even abuse my stay more here, for this one will have a modest price of $15, though the ebook on most venues will continue to be free. After that I get Tom Irregardless, also TrueTom vs the Apostates into print, also after similar revisions, no doubt.
So if JWI bends the forum to his own purposes, so do I. So do many here. I’m not sure what else IS the purpose of this forum other than that, for in ideal theocracy all the loyal ones will stick with jw.org and all the soreheads will mutter because they cannot picket online conventions. 
So it’s okay to slap him down. Seriously, I have no problem with that, as I have no problem with his long-winded answers, which I do read but usually not too closely. Maybe that is the reason I see no ‘threat’ in them. It’s not the approach I favor, it’s not how I process things. The notion of figuring everything out through pure scholarship doesn’t wash with me, particularly when it is so out of sync with (I love the expression) ‘the facts on the ground.’ If outside scholarship ought not be required on account of the Word making the workman completely equipped, and that argument is used as to chronology, I see no reason why it shouldn’t equally apply here. The ‘facts on the ground’ can be appreciated by most everyone. But the facts on the ground of 100-200 years ago, all openly updated as needed by “tacking” and “new light,” and nobody pretends otherwise, seems not a requirement of the average Joe Witness, but an optional specialty to be chased down by those with the time, talents, and interest.

He did this because it might come before.

This is called a signature. I don’t manually type it out each time, you know. It is time for an update. Thanks for reminding me. I don’t recall what is the free preview on TTvtA, but the entire ebook work of Don’t Know Why is free.
Despite the 200 glitches, and I suspect once I release it I could fine-tune for 200 more (but I won’t), I am very very pleased with it—a vast improvement over that turkey Dear Mr. Putin, which I am embarrassed ever to have unleashed. The new book has four sections: 1) Assault—the ban and its immediate repercussions, 2) Apologia—reasons for the ban are nowhere explicitly stated by Russian, authorities, so I have stated some, as well as how they might be defended, 3) Testimony—the best defense is an offense, someone said, and so these are chapters in which I witness, and 4) Endurance—aftermath of the ban, which took a darker turn than anyone would have predicted, but also put Jehovah’s name and kingdom into the international spotlight. 
Nor are parts 2 and 3 divorced from Russian context. They are both illustrated by Russian examples, making the book a cohesive whole. It has garnered a review already (the more the better, any author says). It is not unmitigated praise, but it is fair. I like it. Straight “5” reviews only indicate you have a lot of friends, anyway. I like honest criticism—in this case it is primarily concerned with reliance on AI for translation, and certain clunky writing that maybe the 200 corrections will alleviate . Although the seemingly clunky AI translating of Bro Sivulsky is actually his own remarks word for word, he speaking English as a second language. So it’s good. Remember, I said in my introduction, I am an American who still thinks Ilya Kuriaken of the Man from UNCLE was a pretty good Russian super spy, even though I recall Pravda or someone saying that he was not and how could those ridiculous Americans think so.
sigh….Nor would any other books be written about the Bible by anyone, nor would anyone else ever comment on it, nor would anyone ever teach it, or expound upon it, or interpret it. Anything other than a direct quote would be taboo.

This reminds me of a scene from Tom Irregardless and Me in which I bring my Bible Student Ted Putsch along on my return visit with Bernard Strawman and the two can’t stand one another. “It couldn’t be simpler!” Ted all but shouts at the pompous fellow, “or is that what is the problem with you?!”
This is not to say that JWI is like Bernard, only that there is almost hostility from Ted, who is ‘zealous for God.’ (I suspect Bro Rando is something like Ted.)  I’ll come to JWI’s defense, even as I say I think he’s off-base and if he should get into hot water over it, I will say ‘it’s on him.’ I’ll do it because I like both you guys, Thinking and him
As best as I can tell, he’s indulging a hobby, the same as everyone else here is. It’s a pastime, same as it is for others. I suppose answering him with rancor is also a pastime, if you get worked up over what he says. You should do it. Why not? It’s not as though I am exactly nice to certain other ones on this forum.
He doesn’t bring it into the Kingdom Hall. He also has no problem with the notion of humans taking the lead. As far as I can see, he teaches what Witnesses teach, with the caveat now and then of saying that ‘this is our present understanding,’ instead of ‘this is the way it is!!’ I don’t have a problem with him. He’s on a tiny internet backwater forum regularly followed by (as he said, and from all appearances it seems to be so) 6 six heroes and 6 villains. Perhaps there are that many again who follow along, but beyond that, I doubt there is any audience beyond the fluke visitor now and then. Of course, once you put something on the internet, ‘it stays there forever!!!’ but it is also immediately buried, and not so easily found even by one searching for it. Not a problem for me. It is when he publishes a book of separatism like Rulf that I’ll leave him to twist in the wind.
He’s indulging a pastime, laying his opinions out with as much support as he can muster, maybe even imagining someone in high places will pick up and mull over it. Everyone here is indulging a pastime. No one, even of the good guys, is a stereotypical Witness. One thing he doesn’t do is link to his own website, as several here do, including myself. Some are going into overdrive on it, Bro Rando and the woman from the hills, I think. PSomH thinks I am here to promote my books. Of course I am in part, but if I really was, believe me, it would be much more in-your-face than the occasional references that I make. 
As an example, here I have received my author’s copy of I Don’t Know Why We Persecute Jehovah’s Witnesses: Searching for the Why. Even after numerous proofs, some by self and some by others, when I see it in print, I immediately make about 200 corrections! Whoa! do I appreciate the advantage of a publisher who edits! None of the corrections are major at this point, nor even typos per say, but small glitches that make for reading not so smooth as could be. Once I upload the amended version, finally finally finally a print book is good to go on Amazon. And then I’ll even abuse my stay more here, for this one will have a modest price of $15, though the ebook on most venues will continue to be free. After that I get Tom Irregardless, also TrueTom vs the Apostates into print, also after similar revisions, no doubt.
So if JWI bends the forum to his own purposes, so do I. So do many here. I’m not sure what else IS the purpose of this forum other than that, for in ideal theocracy all the loyal ones will stick with jw.org and all the soreheads will mutter because they cannot picket online conventions. 
So it’s okay to slap him down. Seriously, I have no problem with that, as I have no problem with his long-winded answers, which I do read but usually not too closely. Maybe that is the reason I see no ‘threat’ in them. It’s not the approach I favor, it’s not how I process things. The notion of figuring everything out through pure scholarship doesn’t wash with me, particularly when it is so out of sync with (I love the expression) ‘the facts on the ground.’ If outside scholarship ought not be required on account of the Word making the workman completely equipped, and that argument is used as to chronology, I see no reason why it shouldn’t equally apply here. The ‘facts on the ground’ can be appreciated by most everyone. But the facts on the ground of 100-200 years ago, all openly updated as needed by “tacking” and “new light,” and nobody pretends otherwise, seems not a requirement of the average Joe Witness, but an optional specialty to be chased down by those with the time, talents, and interest.

Not at all. I would say, as I have heard someone else say, “With God all things are possible!”

“There is nothing more important than appearing to be religious.”
That being the case, we’re good here.

He did this because it might come before.

I see you haven’t visit my gift shop to peruse my new line placard, sweatshirt, and accessories offerings: “2034 is the Door!”
I actually didn’t know you could take down your own thread. Comments, yes, but not the whole thread, and even comments only for a limited time. There are some turkeys of mine that long ago would have bit the dust had I known that.

This is called a signature. I don’t manually type it out each time, you know. It is time for an update. Thanks for reminding me. I don’t recall what is the free preview on TTvtA, but the entire ebook work of Don’t Know Why is free.
Despite the 200 glitches, and I suspect once I release it I could fine-tune for 200 more (but I won’t), I am very very pleased with it—a vast improvement over that turkey Dear Mr. Putin, which I am embarrassed ever to have unleashed. The new book has four sections: 1) Assault—the ban and its immediate repercussions, 2) Apologia—reasons for the ban are nowhere explicitly stated by Russian, authorities, so I have stated some, as well as how they might be defended, 3) Testimony—the best defense is an offense, someone said, and so these are chapters in which I witness, and 4) Endurance—aftermath of the ban, which took a darker turn than anyone would have predicted, but also put Jehovah’s name and kingdom into the international spotlight. 
Nor are parts 2 and 3 divorced from Russian context. They are both illustrated by Russian examples, making the book a cohesive whole. It has garnered a review already (the more the better, any author says). It is not unmitigated praise, but it is fair. I like it. Straight “5” reviews only indicate you have a lot of friends, anyway. I like honest criticism—in this case it is primarily concerned with reliance on AI for translation, and certain clunky writing that maybe the 200 corrections will alleviate . Although the seemingly clunky AI translating of Bro Sivulsky is actually his own remarks word for word, he speaking English as a second language. So it’s good. Remember, I said in my introduction, I am an American who still thinks Ilya Kuriaken of the Man from UNCLE was a pretty good Russian super spy, even though I recall Pravda or someone saying that he was not and how could those ridiculous Americans think so.
sigh….Nor would any other books be written about the Bible by anyone, nor would anyone else ever comment on it, nor would anyone ever teach it, or expound upon it, or interpret it. Anything other than a direct quote would be taboo.

I see you haven’t visit my gift shop to peruse my new line placard, sweatshirt, and accessories offerings: “2034 is the Door!”
I actually didn’t know you could take down your own thread. Comments, yes, but not the whole thread, and even comments only for a limited time. There are some turkeys of mine that long ago would have bit the dust had I known that.

This reminds me of a scene from Tom Irregardless and Me in which I bring my Bible Student Ted Putsch along on my return visit with Bernard Strawman and the two can’t stand one another. “It couldn’t be simpler!” Ted all but shouts at the pompous fellow, “or is that what is the problem with you?!”
This is not to say that JWI is like Bernard, only that there is almost hostility from Ted, who is ‘zealous for God.’ (I suspect Bro Rando is something like Ted.)  I’ll come to JWI’s defense, even as I say I think he’s off-base and if he should get into hot water over it, I will say ‘it’s on him.’ I’ll do it because I like both you guys, Thinking and him
As best as I can tell, he’s indulging a hobby, the same as everyone else here is. It’s a pastime, same as it is for others. I suppose answering him with rancor is also a pastime, if you get worked up over what he says. You should do it. Why not? It’s not as though I am exactly nice to certain other ones on this forum.
He doesn’t bring it into the Kingdom Hall. He also has no problem with the notion of humans taking the lead. As far as I can see, he teaches what Witnesses teach, with the caveat now and then of saying that ‘this is our present understanding,’ instead of ‘this is the way it is!!’ I don’t have a problem with him. He’s on a tiny internet backwater forum regularly followed by (as he said, and from all appearances it seems to be so) 6 six heroes and 6 villains. Perhaps there are that many again who follow along, but beyond that, I doubt there is any audience beyond the fluke visitor now and then. Of course, once you put something on the internet, ‘it stays there forever!!!’ but it is also immediately buried, and not so easily found even by one searching for it. Not a problem for me. It is when he publishes a book of separatism like Rulf that I’ll leave him to twist in the wind.
He’s indulging a pastime, laying his opinions out with as much support as he can muster, maybe even imagining someone in high places will pick up and mull over it. Everyone here is indulging a pastime. No one, even of the good guys, is a stereotypical Witness. One thing he doesn’t do is link to his own website, as several here do, including myself. Some are going into overdrive on it, Bro Rando and the woman from the hills, I think. PSomH thinks I am here to promote my books. Of course I am in part, but if I really was, believe me, it would be much more in-your-face than the occasional references that I make. 
As an example, here I have received my author’s copy of I Don’t Know Why We Persecute Jehovah’s Witnesses: Searching for the Why. Even after numerous proofs, some by self and some by others, when I see it in print, I immediately make about 200 corrections! Whoa! do I appreciate the advantage of a publisher who edits! None of the corrections are major at this point, nor even typos per say, but small glitches that make for reading not so smooth as could be. Once I upload the amended version, finally finally finally a print book is good to go on Amazon. And then I’ll even abuse my stay more here, for this one will have a modest price of $15, though the ebook on most venues will continue to be free. After that I get Tom Irregardless, also TrueTom vs the Apostates into print, also after similar revisions, no doubt.
So if JWI bends the forum to his own purposes, so do I. So do many here. I’m not sure what else IS the purpose of this forum other than that, for in ideal theocracy all the loyal ones will stick with jw.org and all the soreheads will mutter because they cannot picket online conventions. 
So it’s okay to slap him down. Seriously, I have no problem with that, as I have no problem with his long-winded answers, which I do read but usually not too closely. Maybe that is the reason I see no ‘threat’ in them. It’s not the approach I favor, it’s not how I process things. The notion of figuring everything out through pure scholarship doesn’t wash with me, particularly when it is so out of sync with (I love the expression) ‘the facts on the ground.’ If outside scholarship ought not be required on account of the Word making the workman completely equipped, and that argument is used as to chronology, I see no reason why it shouldn’t equally apply here. The ‘facts on the ground’ can be appreciated by most everyone. But the facts on the ground of 100-200 years ago, all openly updated as needed by “tacking” and “new light,” and nobody pretends otherwise, seems not a requirement of the average Joe Witness, but an optional specialty to be chased down by those with the time, talents, and interest.

This reminds me of a scene from Tom Irregardless and Me in which I bring my Bible Student Ted Putsch along on my return visit with Bernard Strawman and the two can’t stand one another. “It couldn’t be simpler!” Ted all but shouts at the pompous fellow, “or is that what is the problem with you?!”
This is not to say that JWI is like Bernard, only that there is almost hostility from Ted, who is ‘zealous for God.’ (I suspect Bro Rando is something like Ted.)  I’ll come to JWI’s defense, even as I say I think he’s off-base and if he should get into hot water over it, I will say ‘it’s on him.’ I’ll do it because I like both you guys, Thinking and him
As best as I can tell, he’s indulging a hobby, the same as everyone else here is. It’s a pastime, same as it is for others. I suppose answering him with rancor is also a pastime, if you get worked up over what he says. You should do it. Why not? It’s not as though I am exactly nice to certain other ones on this forum.
He doesn’t bring it into the Kingdom Hall. He also has no problem with the notion of humans taking the lead. As far as I can see, he teaches what Witnesses teach, with the caveat now and then of saying that ‘this is our present understanding,’ instead of ‘this is the way it is!!’ I don’t have a problem with him. He’s on a tiny internet backwater forum regularly followed by (as he said, and from all appearances it seems to be so) 6 six heroes and 6 villains. Perhaps there are that many again who follow along, but beyond that, I doubt there is any audience beyond the fluke visitor now and then. Of course, once you put something on the internet, ‘it stays there forever!!!’ but it is also immediately buried, and not so easily found even by one searching for it. Not a problem for me. It is when he publishes a book of separatism like Rulf that I’ll leave him to twist in the wind.
He’s indulging a pastime, laying his opinions out with as much support as he can muster, maybe even imagining someone in high places will pick up and mull over it. Everyone here is indulging a pastime. No one, even of the good guys, is a stereotypical Witness. One thing he doesn’t do is link to his own website, as several here do, including myself. Some are going into overdrive on it, Bro Rando and the woman from the hills, I think. PSomH thinks I am here to promote my books. Of course I am in part, but if I really was, believe me, it would be much more in-your-face than the occasional references that I make. 
As an example, here I have received my author’s copy of I Don’t Know Why We Persecute Jehovah’s Witnesses: Searching for the Why. Even after numerous proofs, some by self and some by others, when I see it in print, I immediately make about 200 corrections! Whoa! do I appreciate the advantage of a publisher who edits! None of the corrections are major at this point, nor even typos per say, but small glitches that make for reading not so smooth as could be. Once I upload the amended version, finally finally finally a print book is good to go on Amazon. And then I’ll even abuse my stay more here, for this one will have a modest price of $15, though the ebook on most venues will continue to be free. After that I get Tom Irregardless, also TrueTom vs the Apostates into print, also after similar revisions, no doubt.
So if JWI bends the forum to his own purposes, so do I. So do many here. I’m not sure what else IS the purpose of this forum other than that, for in ideal theocracy all the loyal ones will stick with jw.org and all the soreheads will mutter because they cannot picket online conventions. 
So it’s okay to slap him down. Seriously, I have no problem with that, as I have no problem with his long-winded answers, which I do read but usually not too closely. Maybe that is the reason I see no ‘threat’ in them. It’s not the approach I favor, it’s not how I process things. The notion of figuring everything out through pure scholarship doesn’t wash with me, particularly when it is so out of sync with (I love the expression) ‘the facts on the ground.’ If outside scholarship ought not be required on account of the Word making the workman completely equipped, and that argument is used as to chronology, I see no reason why it shouldn’t equally apply here. The ‘facts on the ground’ can be appreciated by most everyone. But the facts on the ground of 100-200 years ago, all openly updated as needed by “tacking” and “new light,” and nobody pretends otherwise, seems not a requirement of the average Joe Witness, but an optional specialty to be chased down by those with the time, talents, and interest.

Nothing….it’s incredible what technology the governments have that are secret…and that’s with out bringing in the demons powers ..
I think we all underestimate the cunning and unbelievable power beyond our poor human brains capabilities…

Not at all. I would say, as I have heard someone else say, “With God all things are possible!”

Be that as it may, I apologize for implying that our Librarian is a lush.

if you can pry the bottle from the fingers of @The Librarian.

I apologize. It’s all the rage these days.

if you can pry the bottle from the fingers of @The Librarian.

if you can pry the bottle from the fingers of @The Librarian.

When one understands  WHY things are the way they are…one then gets a certain peace ..that others who are spiritually   naked cannot…then we can go with ease and chew on the bone because we know these things Must  take place.
Im glad I know about it….at times I wish I didn’t….but then I would be sick with worry and in fear because of not knowing the way out…
This tribulation is less painful because we understand this….but hey…I’ll beat you to the fridge door….you can have the bone…I’ll have the drink 🍺 
 

Maybe they’ll change it.
Or maybe we’ll learn to deal with the whole thing as a metaphor. (though I don’t see how)
Meanwhile, if someone starts giving me a hard time over this in the ministry, I tell them its okay to treat it as a metaphor, and on that basis, see what can they draw from it. A certain type of person almost takes that as a compliment—that you are not rubbing their nose in ‘Adam & Eve’ but you are deeming them smart enough that they can figure out a metaphor. I even briefly won over my return visit Bernard Strawman, whom everyone but me thinks is a waste of time, on this point.
I used to call people like this ones who suffer from “We are wise and learned adults, far too clever to be sold Adam and Eve. What’s next—Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck?” syndrome. But now I drop the derisiveness, which does little good anyhow, and just invite them to treat it as a metaphor. After all, science is pretty universal that Adam & Eve is for dumbbells, and we are all taught that science is the be-all and end-all. Training like that doesn’t turn around on a dime.
Sometimes when they see how well the metaphor works out they forget all about “science” and they put their “cognitive dissonance” on the shelf as something to work out later. You don’t have to know everything. It’s the antithesis of humility to think that you do—or can.
I’’m convinced the phrase “cognitive dissonance” is an appeal to our pride and overall dumbs us down. It is an idea worthy of a pamphlet, but not the volumes dedicated to it. People can’t simultaneously hold two conflicting ideas as true at the same time? Of course they can. A little humility solves the problem, a willingness to put this or that on the shelf pending more information, which may or may not come, but in the meantime, you can’t rush it. You can’t just check yourself at the door because of a few facts that don’t line up. I note how often in mathematics, proofs will commence with assuming this or that point is true, and then seeing where that assumption leads. They don’t just stop dead in their tracks because they don’t know up front whether something is true or not
When I first came across Jehovah’s Witnesses, I was astounded that here were people who actually believed in Adam and Eve. They didn’t look stupid, or if so in no greater proportion than anyone else, yet all my life I had heard that only the reddest of the rednecks believed in Adam and Eve.  I couldn’t figure it out. I decided to shelve it for future resolution. I still don’t know how certain things will align. But the answer to the ‘problem of evil,’—why a loving God would permit it, the answer to the reason for and origin of death, the coherent answer to the question of how Christ’s death could benefit us—all these things were so overwhelming, that I decided to give “science” the back seat, not the front seat it usually demands. Without Jesus as the “first Adam,” a perfect man who by holding the course, repurchased us from that first perfect man who sinned and sold us out, the question of ‘Why Jesus died from us’ devolves into a mushy and intellectually unsatisfying “because he loved us.” To be sure, the head is not everything, but neither is it nothing. 
There is some sort of chromosomal evidence that goes back about 6K years. I think @Araunaposted of it not too long ago. I haven’t looked at it closely. Maybe that represents the reconciliation of timelines that otherwise don’t reconcile. It is roundly shouted down by majority scientists today. But we ought to know by now that being shouted down by the majority means nothing. Doesn’t this entire thread establish that? Or what of @JW Insider, who takes a line contrary to almost everyone else (and i think he’s wrong on the point) and declares bad reports of the CCP overblown? Here he is shouted down, but perhaps elsewhere he is paraded around as a visionary. Anything can be spun any way, by people who may or not be disingenuous. 
The majority team gets the ball and then tilts the field so steeply as to tumble the minority team right off it.
 

Many generations later, once the ravages of sin had thoroughly worked themselves into the chromosomes, yes.

“Consider the future!” said the pre-Joker to the police informant as he plugged him from afar with a bullet in a movie you surely didn’t see but you absolutely know that Pudgy the Dog did.
Aside from that—that really is a pretty good analysis you did above. Is that what we call ‘Reasoning from the Scriptures?’

In the US, Covid 19 deaths have topped 600K. I’ve come to believe that the majority were preventable but for the prevailing meme that it was untreatable, that one with a positive case should sit at home, take fluids and bed rest, and only if it got really bad, go to the hospital—by which time is was often too late.
The last physical I had I asked my doctor if were to come down with Covid, would he be able to treat it? Of course i can, he said, almost surprised at the question. He went on to relate a few drugs he has used to treat patients—he has done many—and they are some of the same drugs condemned in ‘high places’ as ineffective or even dangerous. You have mentioned some of them. We use them all the time, he says. They work fine in combination.
He’s an older man and thus not so likely to be intimidated as is a younger doctor just starting out, beholden to many and intent upon paying off medical school debts.
There was a time I used to dismiss all talk of ‘conspiracy theories’—not on the grounds that people were not evil enough—they can easily be that—but on the basis that they were not smart enough, that there were too many stories that must be corroborated for a theory to hold up and it would be too easy for others to punch holes in it. It’s a bit like how Abraham Lincoln once said that he was not smart enough to lie, meaning that once he did, he would have to adjust every subsequent statement to harmonize with that first lie, and he would surely trip himself up in the intent.
But now I see that concern is not the operative one. You simply can repeat anything loudly and repeatedly, drown out the competition, or even pull the plug on them, and eventually people believe whatever they’re told. It doesn’t matter if people punch holes in it. You simply shout them down and call them quacks.