&gt;<i>I feel like you skimmed the post</i><p>Your feelings have lead you astray in this case. I read every word.<p>I read Humphries&#x27; claims of his own expertise in 5th century history, his claims of Ferguson&#x27;s ignorance and claims and over-simplification of the same and his outright personal attack at the end and I was not impressed with either his critique or his methods. Rather than attacking the person (or even his sources), why not address the actual fallacies in his historical analogies?<p>What is good for a political talk show blowhard seeking ratings is not the same as what is good for a constructive discussion.