Loss Leader
1st October 2006, 09:04 PM
My thesis is that Skeptic4Sure is an alias of Truthseeker1234. I was not the first poster who suggested this. I believe this for several reasons.
I believe Truthseeker1234 suffers from a narcissistic personality disorder (http://www.n-courage.net/). He demonstrates: an obvious self-focus in interpersonal exchanges as when he created several threads about his own personal challenge; a lack of psychological awareness and difficulty with empathy as when he compared the known facts of 9/11 with Holocaust denial; haughty language as his posting style attests; a propensity to use other people without considering the cost of that for them as when he offered $1,000.00 to write a book for him; pretending to be more important than he is as when he "revealed" details about his identity; brags and exaggerates his achievements as when he mentioned being on the ScholarsForTruth homepage; and he cannot view the world from the perspective of another person.
Skeptic4Sure first posted at 4:30 p.m. on September 30. This is several hours after Truthseeker1234 was suspended for one week. Skeptic4Sure has assiduously avoided any threads that Truthseeker1234 posted in. He even went so far as to claim for a short time to be a "skeptic." Even so, I believe that Truthseeker's underlying psychological condition cannot be hidden no matter how carefully he chooses his words.
And he has not chosen his words carefully. His first post was a confrontational one accusing board members of stalking and called those on the board "You guys." His oppositional behavior from the first post shows an unsympathetic focus on himself. It also mirrors the language of Truthseeker1234. Examples:
guys, the propogation times of sound through different media is interesting, but not relevant.
you anti-science guys are tossing out data
Cmon, you guys
You guys know what I want, your'e being silly.
Skeptic4Sure and Truthseeker1234 also seem to share debate styles. Both frequently declare that whatever has been shown to them is insufficient and demand more evidence.
Skepic4Sure wrote:
, but you being skeptics and all should know you need more proof than that.
Again Wildcat, I'm waiting for an answer.
That is only your own theorizing and interpretation, with no proof.
Where is the actual proof?
Vague references to board politics on someone else's board is not proof of anything.
You are making big claims, I am asking you to prove it.
I am asking for proof of claims.
I am just asking for proof, not opinions on whether someon is gullible or not. That is your opinion.
You would think with so much evidence to prove your case, this would be simple.
I am asking for proof that he is NOT a pilot. I already know you have no satisfactory proof that he is "stupid". That is your opinion and interpretation.
Ok no links, no proof, just opinion and innuendo. I need more.
This was in 44 posts in three hours. Compare Truthseeker1234's posts.
I'm looking for actual evidence,
Still waiting for anyone to offer even an attempted answer to
I'm still waiting for any evidence that windows broke from heat.
You are ignoring evidence that contradicts your hypothesis, a violation of scientific method.
you anti-science guys are tossing out data simply because it conflicts with your hypothesis.
Skeptic4Sure also made this statement: "anonymity is a prized possession on the internet."
It is similar to these statements by Truthseeker1234:
I originally intended just to remain anonymous.
My real identity will be revealed soon enough. I have given clues.
There seems to be great curiosity out there about just who I might happen to turn out to be in real life. I will tell all to Kate, and Kate will have herself a great story.
I seek input from other members.
I believe Truthseeker1234 suffers from a narcissistic personality disorder (http://www.n-courage.net/). He demonstrates: an obvious self-focus in interpersonal exchanges as when he created several threads about his own personal challenge; a lack of psychological awareness and difficulty with empathy as when he compared the known facts of 9/11 with Holocaust denial; haughty language as his posting style attests; a propensity to use other people without considering the cost of that for them as when he offered $1,000.00 to write a book for him; pretending to be more important than he is as when he "revealed" details about his identity; brags and exaggerates his achievements as when he mentioned being on the ScholarsForTruth homepage; and he cannot view the world from the perspective of another person.
Skeptic4Sure first posted at 4:30 p.m. on September 30. This is several hours after Truthseeker1234 was suspended for one week. Skeptic4Sure has assiduously avoided any threads that Truthseeker1234 posted in. He even went so far as to claim for a short time to be a "skeptic." Even so, I believe that Truthseeker's underlying psychological condition cannot be hidden no matter how carefully he chooses his words.
And he has not chosen his words carefully. His first post was a confrontational one accusing board members of stalking and called those on the board "You guys." His oppositional behavior from the first post shows an unsympathetic focus on himself. It also mirrors the language of Truthseeker1234. Examples:
guys, the propogation times of sound through different media is interesting, but not relevant.
you anti-science guys are tossing out data
Cmon, you guys
You guys know what I want, your'e being silly.
Skeptic4Sure and Truthseeker1234 also seem to share debate styles. Both frequently declare that whatever has been shown to them is insufficient and demand more evidence.
Skepic4Sure wrote:
, but you being skeptics and all should know you need more proof than that.
Again Wildcat, I'm waiting for an answer.
That is only your own theorizing and interpretation, with no proof.
Where is the actual proof?
Vague references to board politics on someone else's board is not proof of anything.
You are making big claims, I am asking you to prove it.
I am asking for proof of claims.
I am just asking for proof, not opinions on whether someon is gullible or not. That is your opinion.
You would think with so much evidence to prove your case, this would be simple.
I am asking for proof that he is NOT a pilot. I already know you have no satisfactory proof that he is "stupid". That is your opinion and interpretation.
Ok no links, no proof, just opinion and innuendo. I need more.
This was in 44 posts in three hours. Compare Truthseeker1234's posts.
I'm looking for actual evidence,
Still waiting for anyone to offer even an attempted answer to
I'm still waiting for any evidence that windows broke from heat.
You are ignoring evidence that contradicts your hypothesis, a violation of scientific method.
you anti-science guys are tossing out data simply because it conflicts with your hypothesis.
Skeptic4Sure also made this statement: "anonymity is a prized possession on the internet."
It is similar to these statements by Truthseeker1234:
I originally intended just to remain anonymous.
My real identity will be revealed soon enough. I have given clues.
There seems to be great curiosity out there about just who I might happen to turn out to be in real life. I will tell all to Kate, and Kate will have herself a great story.
I seek input from other members.