[Chris Talk]

That is just IT. People ask me for recommended reading, and I am at a loss, for of course I cannot endorse ALL of what ANYbody says, including Sitchin of course.

And when we are talking about THIS field, any writers who touch it are unconventional, rather unusual people, and may have slick spots and hobby horses -- who DOESN'T -- in their brains/minds.

The works I have recommended are important background reading IMHO, because so few works that ARE helpful exist!
What am I to say, "read Velikovsky?" That is vital background reading too, in a field where so little that is truly valid exists! They are all off on something, but if I reccommend one, then somebody tries to belabor me with either some specific error that writer makes, or more commonly like YOU, just claim that the writer is disreputable or has been "debunked," often unfairly.

Does the critic imagine that I am UNAWARE of that? But these books however flawed, are all we have.

[Quix]

VERY WELL SAID.

In this field, when one spits out the bones, often, there's very little left. And discerning valid puzzle pieces from wholesale disinformation, ignorance, stupid bias, lies from the pit etc. . . . not small task indeed.

I understand very well the important point you make.