Skeptic Project

"Linking a message board where people said I lied, does not make me a liar."
True, but if they have enough evidence you are, and they do, then you are a liar.

"Linking a message board where people said I cheated, does not make me a cheater."
Given we see you are a liar, this is suspect. Also you cheat in debating by egging people on to call you a name so you can claim "AD HOMOMIODZ! I WINDED THE DEBATE!"

"Me pointing out that I have never been convicted of cheating or lying about anything in my 12 year history of participating in that organization is evidence you are wrong."

Neil, If I had a dollar for every time you deliberately misrepresented or lied I wouldn't need a student loans.

Neil, if you just provide hard proof that your post were doctored, then you could just put a stop to this. Circumstantial evidence is not valid in this case. There is hard evidence in the form of the IP addresses and no proof, only allegation, of the post being doctored.

In order for you to prove something, you have to have evidence.

I agree, provide proof that the posts were doctored.

SQUIRMING SO HARD WTF

"Neil, if you just provide hard proof that your post were doctored, then you could just put a stop to this. Circumstantial evidence is not valid in this case. There is hard evidence in the form of the IP addresses and no proof, only allegation, of the post being doctored."

My main point here Kaiser, is there is no motive. And the elaborate conspiracy theory that I would stage this whole thing to try and discredit James Kush or Mario is absurd. Apparently I would put Peter's parents at risk for the sake of discrediting a couple of trolls who discredit themselves frequently? As someone said earlier in this thread. They both engage in hyperbole, misleading text, and in some cases outright lies.

The only way to acquire the evidence you are talking about would be to log into James Kush's account. There is no way obviously I would ever be able to do this.

I would also point out, that you cannot provide any conclusive evidence that he did not edit the posts in question. This I might add is why screenshots are often held as questionable evidence.

So instead, we come back to motive. And there is none. There is no way this could benefit me.

You are linking Kush's motive as a reason to doctor your posts, but now you need hard evidence that that's what happened. You are giving circumstantial evidence and you need to solidify it. Now, if you can show where these posts were originally posted we can attempt to find the website's cache.

The motives of crazy people are irrelevant. If they were rational, they wouldn't be crazy people.

Which is why I don't waste my time trying to figure out Neil's motives.

Also VTV even said above that even if the evidence is provided that the posts were not doctored he would not believe the person making the claims:

Also, I find it highly unlikely that James is going to let any of you log into his blog. If he provides screen shots of the comments without "edited" next to them that would be a simple matter for him to fake.

Not that I would trust any of you to verify it even if he let you log in anyway.

http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forums/topic/vtv-goes-where-even-cs-wont-he-exposes-merolas-parents/page/3#post-39250</p>

And he has the audacity to lecture us about confirmation bias here:

http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forums/topic/vtv-goes-where-even-cs-wont-he-exposes-merolas-parents/page/2#post-39224

LAST WORDITIS

You see, James Kush was very clever. He edited the posts without changing them in order to launch an elaborate conspiracy against Neil a month later!

I'm not sure if this will help clear things up but I found a web cache of anticultist thread where I think VTV claimed Anticulitsted must of edited the post beforehand. The cache is from April 27, 2011.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:OS5BLXbm4QwJ:anticultist.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/peter-joseph-merola-is-plain-arrogant/+http://anticultist.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/peter-joseph-merola-is-plain-arrogant/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com

The cache shot is from April. Anticultist couldn't of known what JK was going to have on his blog before he had it on his blog. I do not believe Anticultist edited the message VTV wrote.

LOL yeah James Kush is like Neils imaginary Illuminati , banker joooz, I mean elite, he has everything planned long in advance and even the mistakes James might make are intentional to win Neil everytime.

What we know:

There are no photoshops of any of these comments as they are still live and online right now. The first theory proposed by VTV was that they were doctored in their screenshot form- we have established that is not the case.

As far back as one month, the posts were no different than they appear now. This begs the question of why they would be doctored back between March and April, but the post by James Kush would only appear now.

EDIT: Almost forgot that theory 2, the posts were edited, would also require Anti-cultists comments to have been altered BEFORE the posts appeared on Kush's website.

Then we come to motive again.

Is it in James Kush's best interest to give you that information?

This is another reason none of this would ever go down in a court of law.

First of all, in a court of law his blog could be taken and examined. And would be done before he could of doctored the evidence.

Now all you have is his word to go on that any information he gives you is not doctored. You are basically asking a criminal to hand you the murder weapon.

You say there is 0 reason to believe they are doctored, but you still refuse to admit there is any reason to believe they are not. And there is no reason to believe I would of posted that information in the first place.

In addition, the IP's being "damning" really doesn't mean anything. I already said that I posted there. And I already pointed out that he could of used the edit function to change them. You could go post there right now, your IP would be there, and he could doctor the post to say anything he wanted. And it would look like your words.

That's the point.

You say there is 0 reason to believe they are doctored, but you still refuse to admit there is any reason to believe they are not. And there is no reason to believe I would of posted that information in the first place.

Again, Im not interested in bald assertions and motives as evidence- I'm interested in the hard facts, and as of now there is no evidence to suggest there was any doctoring done, and still a gap in the time line between the earliest cache of the website, in April, and now. Now you're creating this wall for the evidence such that even if it emerges it can't be trusted. But what is available does not support your allegations. That's the only thing I'm interested in.