prove them they are flawed, do you have an official source? i guess not, you simply support a theory that fits your taste, unless you prove with official sources no Russian input, other sources as "theories" have the same veracity.1) That's now how things work. You make a claim, you have to back it up. The burden of proof is not on the other party to debunk it. Point of views is no more than opinion. It is pointless to bring up mere opinion and demand solid proof in return.
2) If you actually read your own sources, you'll find for instance that China defense mashup agrees that there is significant Russian input in WS-10. That is not the same thing as being a copy or a clone.
3) I see that you are continuing your steadfast refusal to acknowledge evidence that your own sources are flawed.
There is a true history, but i guess it has not been released by the chinese officialy and you support speculation that later becomes solid facts in the mind of some, but has no real evidence.
Yeah the Russians might be wrong, it is possible, same popular mechanics but prove them wrong, popular mechanics is recalling a real fact, Moo is a real person and he was caught in the US, charged and popular mechanics is telling us a real life story.