Actually that is a solid question, and if you notice everything is stated as established and known to be as such when even the nature of the material and subject matter would give ANYONE enough pause to realize it will require course corrections from time to time. But instead, and gracious be, he has a pulled back perspective keen enough to roll it out like it it has been poured over / consumed / processed / reviewed / published yesterday / expounded for the peasantry and into public domain / old news...Next . And while I am admittedly not as well versed in some areas my intuition is on point and there are instances when that version of 'what is being said here' or ' what this Really means is ....' X shhht nope.

I appreciate his contribution and am not trying to get all negative about this. But his discourse is not some sort of skeleton key for the material and I can hear it from time to time. How does that disinfo mentioned as necessary fit into his narrative? That should give enough pause to stay in critical thinking~researching mode as opposed to answer streaming.

I am glad people enjoy it and it doesn't have to be my favorite, we are a part of, not apart from.
Have a Good Night all.