` 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```