Fetzer wikipedia article - can someone help separate the 'serious' text from satire

[jon]

I think some of the text in the explaining the explanandum section of Fetzer's wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Fetzer#Explaining_the_explanandum) is satire/vandalism. I can't quite figure out which, though - his 'serious' ideas are kind-of odd.

Any public spirited people want to fix this?

[Dr Adequate]

Well, the quotes are quite genuine, and the phrase "explaining the explanandum" is Fetzer's.

It's not satire, he's really like that.

[jon]

How about Fetzer "objecting to the unwillingness of the society to consider 'no big boeing' theories (theories arguing that no big boeings hit the World Trade Center)". That must be made up...mustn't it?

[rwguinn]

How about Fetzer "objecting to the unwillingness of the society to consider 'no big boeing' theories (theories arguing that no big boeings hit the World Trade Center)". That must be made up...mustn't it?
Sigh....
'fraid not--do a search 'round this forum--check out "Star Wars", "Space-based Weapon", lasar vaporisor, any really far-out thing you'd like on 911--He'll be referenced...
Here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=79868) is a link--the latest...