No need to put words in my mouth.
Gee thanks, because I didn't.
I think Will's findings are conclusive that the BofA could not possibly have been dependent upon the KEP. Indeed, the causal relation between them is the obverse of this.
A handful of your spit is probably worth more than your personal opinion about what is and is not conclusive about Will's work--something that is changing on a minute to minute basis, in any case. (Causing Dr. Hauglid to come out of lurk mode and caution Will about the risks of throwing around the word "conclusively.")
Whatever its real purpose ultimately turns out to be, I do think, yes, that the dependence of the KEP upon an already existing BofA has been demonstrated with rigorous cogency.
In other words, he blew the significance of his presentation out of all reasonable proportions, selling it as though it were the best thing since the discovery of the Book of Mormon plates. Now, he has you thinking, a person whose understanding of academia is severely limited (to put it incredibly politely and mildly), that he could have possibly demonstrated such a thing with "rigorous cogency" (empty Will and Droopy New Speak) without having even started the formal discussion.
Droopy, the simple fact is that you are ignorant about academics. And this has nothing to do with my level of agreement with those who disagree with Will. What it has to do with is my well-earned understanding of how academia works--something that neither you nor Will has much of a clue about, but that people like Dr. Hauglid and some of us probably do know something about. You would be well advised to listen to the people who actually work as academics, as opposed to the mindless self-promotions of William Schryver... even though it will be difficult given the level of knee-jerk disdain both of you have for academia.