The CTMU is not passing itself off as an academic theory It can t because Langan is not a member of academia But then again a theory need not be academic to be notable For example print and television journalists and their readers and viewing audiences can deem things notable as well Nor do academics have a monopoly on logical or factual correctness scholarly integrity or intellectual merit except possibly in the well indoctrinated minds of some academics themselves and of course their aspiring apprentices whose eager anticipation of scholastic glory sometimes inflates their academic snobbery to blimpish proportions Byrgenwulf complains that we chaps are not the sole arbiters of what belongs in the article This is correct To his credit he invites others to tag his assertions However this is a bit specious for having belatedly come to the realization that he has no relevant verifiable assertions to make he is now specializing in challenging the assertions of others Thus we now find him imperiously and rather comically demanding that every one of Langan s assertions receive a separate citation when this is flatly unnecessary because the source material in which those assertions are made is already directly linked to the article It is important for Byrgenwulf to understand that he has exactly the same burden of proof as his opponents Not only must he provide a legitimate citation for anything he wishes to add to the article but given that the article already links to ample source material anything he wants to remove or qualify must be proven false irrelevant or non neutral Unfortunately he hasn t yet been able to lock onto this signal He still labors under the assumption that like some sort of Ultimate Bureaucrat he can sit at his keyboard and demand an infinite amount of verification without verifying anything himself By now everyone involved in this matter has come to a stark realization neither Byrgenwulf nor any of his tiny but dedicated band of confederates HAS any citations or other sources of verification for their own accusations They are merely using the article which is faithful to the material it cites to prosecute their philosophical bias against its topic the CTMU which was deemed notable and newsworthy by several international periodicals and news networks They do not like what the CTMU says the article on the CTMU reports on what the CTMU says and what Langan and the press say about the CTMU hence they do not like the article on the CTMU This conflation of the article with the theory is reflected in Byrgenwulf s transparent strategy of attacking the theory through the article attempting to dispose of the message by killing the messenger Meanwhile he seemingly fails to register the fact that he is himself in glaring violation of Wikipedia verifiability policy and that his all too evident editorial bias is in massive violation of NPOV as well Oozing contempt Byrgenwulf has rumbled into the middle of the CTMU article with a load of summary demands snide remarks and self righteous factually worthless criticism but not one relevant citation in hand Nothing he says is verifiable as we have now repeatedly seen he can not even be trusted on matters in which he claims to be an expert This makes it very difficult if not impossible to take his demands seriously