OK, so I was wrong, you are being somewhat sophomoric. Yes, It is true that when the Chinese guy says yin and yang and the Japanese guy says in and yo, they are not exactly exact - however, they are saying exactly the same thing. Bottom line is my point in that post that the source of a lot of his stuff was Chinese - and if you poke around a bit, you will see that it is not just Dan saying that.
If the source of his stuff is Chinese, then that would mean the source of Takeda's stuff is Chinese. But there is no proof of this, because where Takeda learned his material from is exponentially more hazy than Ueshiba. And maybe it is meant to be, but that's aside the point.
Now going to Chinese internal martial arts and creating a system that you believe to be cognate to Ueshiba's personal practice is all well and good! If it helps you push on walls and stuff better, more power to you, that drywall had it coming!
But you aren't practicing what Ueshiba was practicing. It is even debatable whether it is a reconstruction. Incorrectly representing what you are doing as "the true Aikido of Ueshiba" would STILL not be a huge deal as long as you didn't use that as a jusitification to argue against people who follow an actual lineage that goes to Ueshiba and have different technical ideas.