It seems that the debate technique employed (in whereso it be said) by some is to telegraph their own invalid, insufficient and ineffective debate techniques and then accuse those on the opposite side of said debate of engaging in the activities that, in fact (and whereby throughout), said accuser is actually employing. Such techniques are wholly transparent and provide clear evidence of a lack of substance (and of course, underlying documentary support) and intellect on the accusers part. In the end, it makes the accusers arguments feeble and provides clear evidence to all that excesive bloviating with no real substance simply consumes bandwidth.

You have tried to make your point (repeatedly). However, repeating an erronous statement does not increase its accuracy, or its relevancy.