Aung-thwin attack on Emmanuel Guillon

A good example of how Aung-thwin crawls into your head (like in Being John Malkovitz) and tries to navigate you into obedience:

"Emmanuel Guillon also continues to perpetuate the Mon Paradigm, although he does so with some skepticism and caution regarding certain issues [continuing in a footnote] As late as 1999, Emmanuel Guillon, in The Mons, has continued to accept the conquest of Thaton as probably historic, although he considers many of the other stories about Aniruddha as likely to be myth" (The Mists of Ramanna, p. 297)

Ooo! Probably historic! Versus what? Michael Aung-thwin omniscience?

All historic interpretations are "probably" ? Get some humility!

I'm really dieing to find out what the difference between "probably historic" and "likely to be myth" is.