you've got a discipline that isn't quite a science, but usually makes a best effort to resemble one.
Which still ends up better than the wild ravings of uneducated conspiracists.
Do you have some of that for "the supernatural" ?
What is the intended meaning of: "You are only imitating the homeopaths and creationists here"?
Tearing down our current, admittedly flawed, admittedly biased, admittedly fragmentary understanding of history does not cause truth to miraculously reveal itself, but rather creates a vacuum into which will rush the narrative pushed by the people in positions of power. Who controls the past, controls the future. Instead, we can do the best we can, which is to say: produce documents, debate over their veracity, and keep an open mind as to their inaccuracy.
It is essentially a denouncement of historical revisionsm though...
That itself is a great story!
I wonder how many people fell for it. At least one.
I'm sure they do. Nonetheless, they make the best of it. This article tries to say, without saying it, "hey, my made-up story is as good as your carefully researched one."
Similar to intelligent designers saying, "hey, if you throw a bunch of car parts on the floor, they'll never assemble themselves into a car! So it had to be a Designer."
Or homeopaths saying, "There's so much conventional medicine cannot explain. So my herbal cure and natural diet is as good as their chemotherapy!"