My point? I don't know, maybe that David Barton is a less than reliable source? That the "Christian Nation" project is a bunch of hooey? That you presented as authoritative a collection of cites from David Barton without including David Barton's own retraction of the phony quotes he fobbed off in his prior claims? That not much is left of David Barton's credibility? You choose.
None of this actually seems to be substantiated by the link. Were all (or most) of his original quotes unsupported?
You are seeking to besmirch the reputation of a man that I know to be of the highest integrity. And his work has been shown to be of the highest quality.
So as I asked above, please send me links to these alleged "refutation" articles, and I will consider them.
In a nutshell, many of his quotes were from academics, PhD's, and historians. Discovering a weakness in some of their scholarship, he made the decision to withdraw quotes from any secondary sources, and use only primary, original sources. Having made that decision, previous quotes were withdrawn, not because they were false, necessarily, but because they couldn't be substantiated by the original, primary sources.
As I said, contra to your assertions, this seems to raise Barton's level of integrity, not lower it. My next entry will give you some links to his web site were he explains his rationale. [NB: good scholarship demands you check both sides of an issue, and not simply the side that substantiates your pre-judged position.]