I'm watching this thread; and I need also to watch my own participation as well. I recognize I am far from innocent in this matter, so this should be seen as a friendly reflection from one who is involved in the problem also.
NosyNed started this thread, and he has recommended we stick to published web sources. This is a good idea.
Let's avoid, if at all possible, using this thread to debate accuations of dishonesty with other colleagues in the forum.
RAZD, your latest example is a violation of guidelines, in that it is a bare link. The rationale is also weak.
The imputation of dishonesty in presenting only one side of an issue, or failing to link to what you consider good refutations, is open to dispute. We can discuss it, but may I propose you describe the problem more clearly in your post, and that you find a published source that illustrates what you mean, rather than trying to bring disputes from others threads into this one.
Thanks -- AdminSylas