Giving rein to the imagination is fine and as long as nothing is said that is falsifiable there is nothing to say e.g. “prehistoric stone circles were built on energy grids detectable only by the initiated “ might be pompous mystic nonsense but difficult to disprove and best left alone . If a comment is falsifiable e.g. “ the Stonehenge avenue is aligned on the major standstill “ then expect to be put right .Allowing them to propagate in the public domain is unfair to lay readers and muddies the water .
Rudeness is in inverse proportion to content and a sure sign that the “ruder “ has little to argue with ,because of that , whilst not welcomed , it can be viewed positively and usually is .
The same can be applied to any work whether religious or otherwise . Evidence ibased understanding is not the same as being academic .
Is a "closed soul " someone who disagrees with scripture / what you happen to believe .

I could be wrong, but I think hardly any of the people who post on TMA are academics, and even fewer are trained archaeologists. Most people just have a shared interest.

Julian's original book uses plenty of terminology that people wouldn't necessarily understand unless they had some knowledge of this sort of thing. In the Cornwall chapters he refers to "Scillonian tomb", "capstone", "rab-cut", "creep passage", etc etc. My posts, for what they're worth, are based on what I have observed at sites, put together with things I have read. So I call a stone box buried in a barrow a "cist", and the inner side of a hillfort rampart that slopes inwardly a "counterscarp". But there's very little in TMA about Angel People. I reckon the site keeps the spirit of the book, by and large.

You should write and publish your own book Bladup. You won't be held back by restraints put on academics who are expected to offer proof of their claims and are in the main reluctant to offer any far out ideas or 'feelings' they may well have. You are in a position to say what you like, when you like and no comeback on you or loss of future revenue because of it. I did it and will do it again ASAP. The same applies to all of us. If you have something to say then go for it, don't just sit back and whinge about academics as that will get you nowhere at all. What you would bring to the table would be possibly something new and refreshing and not considered seriously before, something that those academics/archaelogists would begin to think about but something they could not claim as their own as you would have beaten them to it...and in print! I, and just about all on this forum, have ideas and inspirations and we feed off each other gaining knowledge along the way that may be either 'with us or against us' in our thoughts. Where we want to take it after that is up to us as individuals. We can either sit back and argue our case over and over on forums or do something practical about it. Just a word of warning though...don't expect an easy ride. You have shown to be a mine of information of sorts, what you need to do now is go out and show that what you claim has a solid foundation to it or suffer the consequences which is what academics never subject themselves to.
All the above is said in a friendly way with no malice intended. Just go for it.