Lundahl (2022q) is No Entertainer and He Fails to Take the Format and Content of this Debate Seriously
Kevin R. Henke
September 23, 2022
A number of my September 15, 2022 essays (mostly Henke 2022c through Henke 2022q) discuss Mr. Lundahl’s serious problems in his essays with spelling, referencing, organization and clarity. Lundahl (2022q) attempts to dismiss his severe writing problems by describing them as “simple administrational issues.” He further refers to me as “spoofing” his formatting. Rather than taking my criticisms seriously, Lundahl (2022q) continues to make dismissive comments that do nothing to resolve his communication problems. Mr. Lundahl’s debating style is seriously flawed and, worst of all, he refuses to improve his communication skills for the sake of our readers. He’s trying to be a comedian and he’s failing at it.
Apparently, Mr. Lundahl did not even bother to read my serious criticisms of his writing style in these essays:
Henke (2022e): “Bibliographies are Important”
Henke (2022f): “Readers Shouldn’t have to Search the Internet, Libraries or Bookstores to Figure out Mr. Lundahl’s References Just Because He Won’t Make a Simple Bibliography with His Essays”
Henke (2022g): “Who is Bishop Challoner? Another Adverse Consequence from the Absence of Proper Referencing in Lundahl (2022a)”
When mentioning Henke (2022i), Lundahl (2022q) admits that I made a good and general point that we need to honor our readers in this debate by writing for their benefit. However, when is Mr. Lundahl going to start writing more clearly, use adequate references, and spell check his work? I still see plenty of misspellings and too many brief and flippant replies in Lundahl (2022q).
I have additional criticisms of his writing style in the following essays:
Henke (2022j): “Proper Spelling is Essential in Communication and not a “Fetish” or an ‘Art’”
Henke (2022k): “Mr. Lundahl Won’t Even Use His Own Oxford English Dictionary and Spell Correctly: The “Carreer” Example”
Henke (2022L): “Another Deliberate Misspelling of Career from Mr. Lundahl: No Justification for Harassing and Confusing Our Readers”
Henke (2022m): “Using English Dictionaries: Merriam-Webster is Good”
Henke (2022n): “Mr. Lundahl Can’t Communicate and He won’t Read His Own Oxford Dictionary and Spell Correctly: The Imaginary “Undecisives” Example”
Henke (2022o): “Mr. Lundahl’s Vague Writing, Lack of References and Misspellings Don’t Serve the Needs of the General Public”
Henke (2022p): “COTUS: Mr. Lundahl’s Undefined Abbreviations Cause More Senselessly Bad Communication and Confusion”
Henke (2022q): “Mr. Lundahl Needs to Concentrate on Becoming a Good English Writer and Forget about Being a Comedian”
Concerning my admonitions in these essays, Lundahl (2022q) later states:
“It would have been fairly appropriate if I had been his student, and preparing a thesis under him. It is not the case.”
But, why shouldn’t Mr. Lundahl meet the high-quality standards of a thesis in this debate? Don’t our readers deserve essays from Mr. Lundahl that have proper spelling, good referencing and clear writing? I understand that authors are allowed to use informal writing, ignore references and create imaginary words and worlds when they write fiction and poetry. But, this is a debate on serious issues related to history, science, mythology and religion. Our readers deserve better from him. If Mr. Lundahl wants to be an entertainer, he should write fiction and not engage in serious debates where our readers are looking for evidence and not lame attempts at comedy.