"
I stand by my deletion on the skepticism page. I didn't delete the whole article by any means. I removed the part about false skepticism because it is unprovable and inhereintly doesn't go together. False being the opposite of truth, and skepticism believeing nothing to be certain. To be a false skeptic is impossible to prove and is not a view point but a chance for people to oppose halocaust deniers and such in a biased way on the wiki. I believe that most likely the halocause for example happened, but I am not going to say it is ""false skepticism"" nor are the ""sources"" any more reliable or proving anything. So you know how to report better, have better contacts, and tend to have a majority(or enough active members) to back your agenda. Then martyr me and get it over with. It is better to delete it since I legitamately believe it to be unsalvagable and completly opinionated to the point that is pushes a biased agenda. The whole point of the page is for the reader to decide what is skepticism and to go from their. Lets make this more of a history book and less of a language arts book. More of a tratise on the basics of known science rather than meta physics and quantum theory.

Retrieved from ""http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wiggalama"""