You have cited other published papers - but note that the latest paper you cite does not answer Kirk's most recent contribution, nor have you given it serious consideration.
How do you know I have not given it serious consideration? I have not discussed it here, but that does not mean I have not considered it. I am not obligated to discuss everything I consider, or to respond to every discussion.
This isn't really the point. The point is that you are fully capable of recognizing strawman argumentation. Further, even if you didn't, it has been pointed out to you multiple times now. But when I cite examples that might be applied to you, you uniformly fail to acknowledge such has been done.
So the point is that you knowingly promote one view over the other, specifically the one that uses faulty logic to unethically suppress the other.
You thereby foster and promote unethical behavior, and since you realize the unethical nature of your position but promote it as logical and scientific, you are dishonest.
The sad thing is how many people are taken in by your stratagem.
And BTW, you have given my 'theories' enough consideration at least to recognize how damaging they are to the idea that LERNs exist, which is why you are acting the way you are.