I think I really only completely responded to half of your critique previously, so let me fix that now. I stand by carefully restricting myself to technically and precisely accurate facts, as much as I am able. But that's responding to how you expounded your point rather than the point itself.
You say I should be less apologetic, and if by that you meant my tone rather than the substance of my perspective, I think you're right. On retrospect, the dismissive vitriol that inspired my comment really didn't come through clearly at all.