Which is precisely why the above lecture was given at Howard and why I posted it in response to your recommendation. There are still people making reference to his work on the basis of errors in his work to try and advance and maintain an ideological view that history keeps contradicting.
No argument there. I agree. However, folks still NEED to read it to discover what the DEBATE is all about to determine whether or not there's some TRUTH in some of his findings. Cuz no scholar I don't care who he/she KNOWS everything about this subject and folks have to careful of the HIDDEN AGENDA. So for me? I'm gonna review everybody's stuff for CLARITY. But!