I think that at each step of the way, it's too easy to think, "Aha... those guys back then didn't know what we know now, so we're speaking from the enlightened point of view". What if the "enlightened ones" are just the next guys in the chute in the archives who have shown that they don't have a clue? Isn't that something that should be considered before everyone starts opining about how things work?
It would have been a good strategy before a lot of past posts; it might be a good strategy now. I have to say, I'm pretty careful to think of everything I write in terms of "will this particular opinion stand up to scrutiny in the future or will I have to eat my words?". Personally, I think it's a good policy, but then again, I don't have the spiritual insight of many on this forum.