Your own papers are not "published articles"

Academia has peer-reviewed journals, if you have evidence publish in them.

>Your own papers are not "published articles"

They ARE “published articles” since you can read them. :-)

They contain textual evidence proving the existence of the practice of operating human breeding grounds.

If you want that evidence in peer-reviewed journals, you’ll have to go look for it.

>They contain textual evidence proving the existence of the practice of operating human breeding grounds.

Our rules forbid fringe hypotheses.

If you want to play academic you need to actually follow the system and publish in a peer-reviewed journal. Because otherwise you're just blogging nonsense.

I do not want to play academic, nor do I want to follow the system.

I sign with my name and I am looking for someone who has the knowledge (alias balls) to debate on the subject.

Well, you can see if you can find one at /r/AskHistorians

This is not the place to test out fringe hypotheses and conspiracy theories.

This is the place to discuss History.

You do not have the knowledge to decide what is a fringe hypothesis and what is a sound claim when ancient texts are involved.

You are doing no good service to History!

> You do not have the knowledge to decide what is a fringe hypothesis and what is a sound claim when ancient texts are involved.

Seeing as I am an actual academic working at an actual university in the field of antiquity, it actually seems like I do.

[removed]

I'm good, but you can take it to r/askhistorians and maybe you can find someone bored enough.