It certainly doesn't exactly indicate a track record of "funny" arguments either. True to form, yes, the discussion of the recession and derivatives market is a prime example - of your predilection for official big government narratives and academic navel gazing while rejecting all the alternative facts that don't comport with them. You claimed it was the leverage of banks due to regulatory reform permitting an increase in leverage, when, in fact, the leverage on banks' balance sheets was roughly the same in 2008 as it was in the 1990s. What do you think has more effect on markets - the actions of CEOs or the actions (and inactions) of federal economic officials? You refuse to even consider the possibility that government has any deleterious effect whatsoever, because you like big government, not because you have the facts on your side. But common sense suggests that the federal government bailing out Bear Sterns and then just months later refusing to do the same for Lehman had a WAY bigger role in confusing (and freezing) credit markets than any poor decisions by a few isolated CEOs. So yes, the facts (and logic) is on my side. The bureaucrats and big government loving academicians are on yours (and you can have that gaggle of bozos).
As for Zerohedge, you don't get to reject the facts they report, or even their interpretations of the facts (when you are simply citing someone else's interpretation of those facts), based on a few posters in their unmoderated forum posting whacky things that I have never cited. You attempt this guilt by association so you don't have to consider the notion that your fealty to the powers that be might be foolish. You aren't going to get an alternative to the narrative on NBC or CNN - you are getting big government propaganda, which you gladly accept because it comports with your misguided "middle" view that big government and socialism is always good while free markets are bad and CEOs are all evil megalomaniacs.
And it is a simple fact that nobody here provides more back up stats and facts to support their posts than me, so I think we know whose figment of imagination the idea that I don't adequately support what I post is. Your problem is that you frankly don't seem to know the difference between opinion and fact, because YOU keep posting opinions and claiming they are facts, not me.