Debating theories that lack cogency in their core statements is a fool's errand.
If you can't clarify the disconnects in your underlying premises, why would anyone waste time 'debating' the larger concepts?
Besides, 90% of what you publish amounts to a blinding flash of the obvious. And the other 10% is condescension and self-adulation. With constant commercials for books.
I've mentioned one particularly egregious example multiple times, but you won't lower yourself to respond. Or can't.