canglong,
You just don’t get it – or want to get it. I agree that my post was out of line, but I was making it to prove a point: that folks shouldn’t make those sorts of proclamations if they aren’t willing to prove it or can’t prove it. And what goes for me, goes for you, goes for the VTM, and goes for everyone. It’s fine to say “we believe this or that” or “our oral tradition is such and such” or “we have this theory” but when you start saying things like “our WCK is the original WCK” and “our history is true and correct and everyone else is wrong” then you put yourself in the position of either being willing and able to prove it or you should expect to be called on it. And to argue that “we’ll share our conclusions – that one’s about how we knwo the truth – but not share the info that verifies/proves it is true” is disingenuous. Then you have the temerity to chide me for challenging those things you’ve decided so generously to “share” (about how HFY is correct and everyone else is wrong) when I say that may be true, but you need to prove it.
And it certainly calls into question why someone or some group would want to “share” such things in the first place. Are you doing it to “help” the WCK community? To lead us all into enlightenment? Or is the VTM just concerned with the “truth”? Concerned enough, it seems, to tell us how HFY’s history is correct and the rest of us wrong, but not concerned enough to show us the info that verifies those claims! Or, is it that these things are just marketing, just ways of attracting students, just ways of making HFY sound better than competing (for students) lineages? Very often folks making marketing claims can’t prove them either. Now I’m not saying that is what HFY/VTM is doing but your actions certainly make it look like that.
You last post shows how bereft your arguments are – it is a simple matter to prove Robert exists, that he knows WCK, and that he taught me (go to his seminar in San Diego and ask him yourself!, look at his driver’s license, etc.). I can introduce you to lots of people, many on this very forum that have met him (even folks that don’t like him and wouldn’t have reasons to lie), there are photos, videos, books, etc. You know, all those things that don’t exist for Wang Ming. 
FWIW, David is correct about our lineage. Sure, Robert has studied with someone in the Moy Yat family, but he’s also studied with many WCK instructors, many in the Yip Man family, some outside of the Yip Man family. But he doesn’t consider them all his “sifu” – the one person who, in his heart, he considers has been the most significant in his development. (Similarly, if you asked Victor or Phil who their sifu was or their lineage, they would indicate Chueng not Moy or Leung, because while Cheung was not their first WCK instructor it is his training methodology they follow). In CWC, for example, Robert lists all these people he has studied with.
The bottom line is this: the VTM/HFY should understand that folks outside of HFY/VTM aren’t going to accept their historical conclusions as true if they aren’t willing and able to prove them (to have them independently verified). They can come up with all the excuses in the world for why they don’t want to provide proof, and all that does is increase our skepticism.
