I'm not sure if I really understand your last response. I'm not talking about questioning everything or about my emotions. My point is very simple. If you are going to set yourself up as an "alternative expert" of any sort, there are a few simple things that you need to be able to to do. One is to give a real résumé (i.e. transparency) as to why you are some level of expert. Another is to give real evidence for any consistent points you make (e.g. "the good guys story", "the cryptos are being supported by the good guys to save us" story, the "Veritaseum is amazing even though all standard ICO checks for it suck" story, etc.) You also need to provide insights that are not just someone else's (e.g. silver is going to go up because Clif said so, gold is going basically nowhere because Clif said so - plus the Grand Canyon story, these cryptos Clif picked are going to go up because Clif said so, etc.) All of these things become evidence that Bix doesn't have proof for much of anything he is giving. That includes his story of Greenspan being the greatest programmer ever and that he also set up the Road to Roota plans at the Fed. I'd just like to see some real evidence and not just continually rehashed stories. That's all.