How is showing that your statement is wrong *unrelated*?
He was citing Urban's Crusade as an example of Papal novelty. There was almost nothing novel about it. We had a tradition of just war that went all the way back to Augustine. Didn't Caleb of Axum invade Yemen to liberate fellow Christians in the 520s? And indulgences for the forgiveness of venial sins were granted way before then for the commission of any pious act. This was already well established, which ealgeone would know if he had the slightest knowledge of the history of indulgences.
Utter failure to even demonstrate his own point. Historical assumptions totally invalid. Hence, unrelated.