What I find particularly amusing about this is the fact that the Truthers need to
defend Gage's stupidity.
He talked a bunch of nonsense. So much so that Ms. Hill skewered him easily, despite not being particularly well versed in the subject. However, Truthers
cannot acknowledge this.
Again, this is because the entire Truth Movement is built upon the perceived credibility of individuals. So whenever Gage says something really dumb, the Truthers can't admit it, can't say "yeah, that part makes no sense," etc., because nothing the guy says is independently verifiable. Therefore, calling into question anything he says means calling into question
everything he says, at which point the Truth Movement implodes at free-fall speed.
This is the problem of pseudoscience. You've hitched your cart to an anchor. You have no choice but to follow your leaders, no matter how stupid a direction they go, or else to get off the bus entirely. It's inevitable that over time, you will talk yourselves further and further into odium and obscurity.
Such is not the case for science. Let's suppose, for sake of argument, Sir Steven Hawking professed a belief in ghosts with no evidentiary support whatsoever. This does not mean that his previous work suddenly becomes invalid. That's because his previous work can be replicated. In science, we would say that "Dr. Hawking made some brilliant contributions, but watch out for his kookery about ghosts," and that's all. It does nothing to the establishment, what we've learned, or what we know.
In the Truth Movement, since none of it is verifiable, there is nothing that survives this episode. Consequently, you haven't learned anything.
So, go right ahead, keep defending Gage to the death. You'd be much better served acknowledging that nearly all of what he said is obvious nonsense -- "black iron curtain" of media conspiracy indeed! -- but then, that would be a rational conclusion, and there's no reason to start now when you're doing so well, is there?
