John Lane is a heavyweight, I do not see the same in Robert Siscoe. I also found Mr. Siscoe to be rude and arrogant in the exchange.
Not think I think Mr. Siscoe is stupid or lacks education, but he is clearly driven by an agenda, something that John Lane is not. One must examine himself, and ask the question, is my only goal the truth, or is it to defend the party line of post-Lefebvre SSPX?
I have been reading John Lane's writings for a very long time, and the only concern he has is to the truth. He loves theology, and thinks like a Catholic by rigorously adhering to approved sources. He is also grounded in philosophy, which lays the correct fertile ground to properly understand theology.