Ron,
I am not trying to disparage the ideas you propose or suggest that they are without merit. I apologize if I gave you that impression. Rather I'm trying to understand the basis for your thoughts and how they account for certain facts as we know them.
After 50+ years of reviewing theses, articles submitted for publication, and grant applications, I'm reading your ideas in a similar manner: What are you proposing? What are your sources of new and old information? What data do you have? How will you test your ideas? One does not have to be a trained academic to use the tools of research. Robert Elgood's works are a good model to follow.
The contributions of Robert Cato to the literature on Moro swords are not limited to his book. He has four publications dating from 1991 to 1996, and these are listed in TD Rogers,
An Annotated Bibliography of Indonesian, Filipino & Malay Edged Weapons, Zwartenkot Art Books: Lieden, 2015 (citation numbers 599–602).
Cato R. The Moros and their swords. Inside Kung-Fu 16(12): 52–55, 82 (1989).
Cato R. Islamic swords of the Southern Philippines. Arts of Asia 21(1): 104–123, 1991.
Cato R. Moro swords, battle blades of a people. Blade, December 1993: 86–87.
Cato R. Moro Swords. Graham Brash: Singapore, 1996.
I have copies of his book and of the Arts of Asia article, but have not read the other two. I believe at least one of these (Arts of Asia) is a peer reviewed publication, and I suspect that there were varying degrees of editorial review for his other writings on this subject--it would be unusual for an editor of a reputable publication not to perform some type of review. So Mr Cato's work has probably been subjected to review by people familiar with the topic and has met with their approval. David's comment that anyone can write a book is true if we are talking about small printings of self-published works funded by the author. Getting someone else to publish your work with large numbers of colored pictures, however, is not something everyone can do.
Because of the review and scrutiny frequently paid to published articles, they carry more weight than, say, blogs or other opinion pieces (such as EEWRS comments) that are posted online. Generally, blogs and opinions are not supported by references or objective data, whereas well reviewed articles will include these and other features that add credibility to the author's thinking.
As I see it, Mr Cato presently has the high ground in his descriptions of Moro weapons. To refute things he has said means being more thorough and accurate. For example, I don't think Cato cited all of his local sources of information. Some may have requested anonymity, but that is something that should have been stated because unattributed statements can be worth very little (as they cannot be verified). A better study would cite key informants and indicate their expertise.
Ron, I think you have the germ of a good idea. In offering comments about what you have said, I'm not trying to win a debate and I don't necessarily disagree with your idea. I am trying to help you convince me that you are right.
Ian