I'm not sure what my credibility has to do with it? I've presented evidence and sources.

I am writing a series, this was part 2 - cherry-picking one point is kinda missing the whole point.

In both of my posts I wrote:

Some of the points that I have raised in this post are less important, or credible than others. I am merely presenting the pertinent evidence that I have discovered with you - it is up to you, the jury to arrive at a verdict.

If one piece of evidence is not convincing - that does not mean that all of the other evidence is invalid.

As always, do not trust anyone, (including me) - always do your own research and don’t let anyone tell you what to believe.

I'm curious - have you read all of part 1 and part 2? Are you going to read the rest of the series?