I'm denying nothing but since it flew over your head I'll explain it in simpler terms: you don't lend credibility to what's being said because it's "just some posters' narrative" and yet you expect to have said credibility when you mention some anonymous ex-conti level pro who is your mate. That's the,
check signature, "trace of irony" in this. And I'm not even pointing out the obvious fact that several people here may be able to make the same claim about knowing an ex-pro who may a different take (again with no way of knowing if it's true or not) or that the fact someone was a pro in itself means little considering how opaque statements from former pros tend to be regarding doping, regardless of their expertise.
Furthermore, you say stuff like "who says G was a classics rider" which is downright hilarious when Thomas himself acknowledged the switch:
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/...-ill-miss-classics-goals-different-now-321233 or "Thomas looking better than he is" while putting 2m on its AdH winning time from the same year he won the Tour -
http://www.climbing-records.com/2022/07/fastest-alpe-dhuez-ascent-in-16-years.html
Apparently by "truisms" you mean facts of which you're ignorant of...