Septic's REAL Identity
Goldhammer
Some of you are familiar with the
Septic troll. Who is he, really?
He is Donald R. Alford, of Bellingham, WA.
Provoked into a massive blunder during a
rash fit net-wankering, his "Fish" sockpuppet
revealed Skeptic's true identity: Donald
R. Alford. Never have the usenet consequences
of lack of premeditation been more clearly
illustrated than by this episode. With all
the effort brought to bear against "Skeptic",
it is surprising that his detractors didn't
pick up on this. It's right here:
http://www.google.ca/groups?selm=MPG.1980a8b73dabd17b9896a2%40news.earth
link.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Compare the email addresses of these
two usenet handles and keep in mind
that Fred Skinner is an incarnation
of Septic:
"Donald Alford" <y3k...@uswest.net>
"Fred Skinner" <y...@NOSPAMuswest.net>
Now compare with the name and address
revealed by "Fish" in the link above:
"Donald Alford" <dral...@comcast.net>
There are other "Donald Alford"s in the
usenet archives:
Donald Alford <dral...@pacificrim.net>
"Donald Alford" <donald...@email.msn.com>
DRAl...@gnn.com (Donald R. Alford)
all from Bellingham, Washington. However the last
is most curious. His record consists of one single
post dating back to Sept 15, 1996.
From: Donald R. Alford (DRAl...@gnn.com)
Subject: Re: Unions aren't needed in America
Newsgroups: alt.society.labor-unions
Date: 1996/09/15
Right, Jerry! And the best way to overcome this
ignorance is to do exactly as you are doing here,
contribute to education by reference to labor law,
etc.
We might even cite links to various sources, so
that the ignorant might contribute to their own
education by reading. For instance, LMRDA
(Landrum-Griffin) is United States Code Title 29,
and one source for that is:
Those of us who are in rail and air transportation
are exempt from the provisions 29USC, but are
protected (for better or for worse, it is debatable)
by the Railway Labor law, 45USC8, which is also
available from the Cornell Law School WWW server
mentioned above.
A good book on labor law (written for the layman)
is:
The rights of employees and union members (an ACLU
handbook) by Outten, W. N.
This can be found at the library at 344.7301 OUTTEN
Don Alford
Bellingham, WA
BNSF Trainman
UTU Local 1024
DRAl...@gnn.com
Donald...@msn.com
What does this have to do with Septic,
you ask? Further investigation connects
this poster to alt.atheism via the mysterious
"D R" <nos...@please.com>
author of some 58 posts back in 1998, two of which
are signed
Don Alford, Bellingham
one even gives his phone number: (360) 733-6496.
Most are posted to alt.atheism and alt.agnosticism.
For instance...
From: D R (nos...@please.com)
Subject: Re: define agnostic (I am agnostic
about 'belief')
Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism, alt.antichristnet,
alt.atheism, alt.blasphemy, alt.bullshit,
alt.censorship
Date: 1998/07/12
I am agnostic about "belief." I don't see any
evidence that belief is relevant to knowledge.
Knowledge is demonstrated by the ability to predict
and control events. If I "know" about cars, I can
demonstrate that I do by predicting what will happen
if, for instance, the engine is not kept supplied
with fuel. I can control what happens by keeping a
supply of fuel -- or not. Knowledge is gained by
operating in the real world (on some dimension or
another). Belief is irrelevant.
Isn't it reasonable to define 'Knowledge' as the
ability to predict and control events? (Or at least
to predict, if control is impossible, as in global
events?) ibfee at usa dot net
Then, Septic himself provided a revelation.
Obscure and little-considered when he first
made it in 1999, most people ignored it as
the ravings of a lunatic. But now we have
the context by which to decode it:
http://www.google.ca/groups?selm=5pW04.12151%24M%25.98435%40news.rdc1.wa
.home.com&output=gplain
From: Skeptic (abuse...@uunet.com)
Subject: Re: PROVE GOD EXISTS
Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,
alt.religion.jehovahs-witn, alt.atheism,
alt.philosophy.debate
Date: 1999/11/30
"My" railcars actually belong to various
functioning, freight-hauling railways, but I am a
stock-holder, and work (part time) as a trainman
(conductor), and computer consultant for the BNSF
http://www.bnsf.com/.
The conclusion? "Skeptic" is none other
than Donald R. Alford of Bellingham, WA,
(360) 733-6496. Look him up, give him a
call, or, even better, drop in on him
for a visit. Meet the nut in person.
++++++++
An extensive 1996 to mid-2003 list
of Septics is appended below for
research purposes.
"ABC" <a...@hotmail.com>
Albert Briggs <bri...@briggs.com>
"Ben" <someone @microsoft.com>
"Bill Gates" <bi...@microsaused.com>
bfsk...@my-deja.com
"Bo Hica" <abuse...@uunet.com>
"Bob D." <bobd...@comcast.com>
"Bob White" <thre...@hotmail.com>
"Boggs" <muddy...@nospamhotmail.com>
muddy...@hotmail.com (Boggs)
"Creon" <doug...@nospamathome.com>
"D. Wolfe" <wo...@stancion.com>
"D R" <nos...@please.com>
"Dick Dragon" <Matt-Sweetma...@alloverthe.net>
"Dick Dragon" <nos...@all.net>
Diesel <abuse...@uu.net>
DRAl...@gnn.com (Donald R. Alford)
"Donald Alford" <donald...@email.msn.com>
Donald Alford <dral...@pacificrim.net>
"Donald Alford" <y3k...@uswest.net>
DR Feelgood <drfeelg...@hotmailspamblock.com>
"Dr. Sinster" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
"Dr. Sinster" <Slather-i...@alloverthe.net>
"Dr. Sister" <NOSPAMab...@uunet.com>
"Dr. Sister" <Slather-i...@alloverthe.net>
dtr...@wolfe.net.com (Fish)
"Frazier" <fr...@stones.com>
"Fred" <som...@amazon.com>
"Fred Skinner" <nos...@all.all>
"Fred Skinner" <y...@NOSPAMuswest.net>
"Frisbyterian" <NOSPAMab...@uunet.com>
"Frisbyterian Skeptic" <NOSPAMab...@uunet.com>
"Gawud" <d...@home.com>
"Hans" <ha...@hotmail.com>
"Hans Van M." <ha...@hotmail.com>
"Ho Hum" <ho...@weareallone.net>
"Ho Hum" <nos...@forme.please>
Hum <hohu...@my-deja.com>
"Huxley" <som...@microsoft.com>
"Ima Skeptic Too" <D...@home.com>
"KB" <k...@hotmail.com>
"KBC" <k...@westlink.cop>
"Krait Bungarus Caeruleus" <k...@wesltink.com>
"McSweeny" <m...@hootmon.com>
"Muddy Boggs" <muddy...@nospamhotmail.com>
"Nick" <nos...@all.all>
"Oil-O-Matic" <ai...@nospam.com>
"one" <o...@world.net>
"Otto" <ottum...@hotmailt.com>
PBJ <p...@nospam.com>
"PsychStudent" <psychs...@earth.net>
"Proulx" <p...@az.net>
"Ray" <r...@hotmail.com>
"Rhode Island Red" <rirroos...@hotmail.com>
"Roger Bush" <ro...@bush.com>
"Romeo" <ro...@shakespear.net>
"Rooster" <abuse...@uunet.com>
"Rooster" <nos...@all.all>
"Rooster" <roo...@hotmail.com>
"Sam Spade" <ssp...@hotmail.com>
"Shleptic" <NOSPAMab...@uunet.com>
"Skeptic" <abuse...@uu.net>
"Skeptic" <abuse...@uunet.com>
"Skeptic" <D...@home.com>
"Skeptic" <nos...@all.all>
"Skeptic" <NOSPAMab...@uunet.com>
"Skeptic" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
"Skeptic Schemeptic" <NOSPAMab...@uunet.com>
"Smith" <nos...@all.all>
"Spike Nail" <abuse...@uunet.com>
"Stanley Leverlock" <st...@nospam.com>
"Stanley/Oilman/Ben/Septic/Whatever" <st...@nospam.com>
"T. Jefferson" <abuse...@uunet.com>
"The Theeeenker" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
"The Theenker" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
"The Thinkerator" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
Tim <tim...@nospam.com>
toadfr...@hotmail.com (Todd Field)
"Tom Wetsuit" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
"Whitey" <to...@hotmail.com>
"Whosya Daddy" <D...@home.com>
"Wolf Blister" <wo...@uunet.com>
oilo...@hotmail.com (Y3K)
"Y3K" <y...@hotmail.com>
"Yoda" <yo...@hotmail.com>
Anti-Septic
[snip]
Heh. Quite an extensive list, I forgot about
some of these. The only ones that I've noticed
are missing, off hand, are "Todd Fields", and
"Puzzling Evidence". How on earth did you manage
to compile them all?
raven1
<goldh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>"Dr. Sinster" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
>"Dr. Sinster" <Slather-i...@alloverthe.net>
Do you have any particular reason to think that "Dr. Sinister" was
Septic? For all his deliberate nastiness, Dr. Sinister seemed quite
intelligent, and appeared to have a considerable knowledge of
Buddhism, neither of which is a quality Septic has ever displayed in
any incarnation.
Mike Smith
=On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:34:15 GMT, "Goldhammer"
=<goldh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
=
=>"Dr. Sinster" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
=>"Dr. Sinster" <Slather-i...@alloverthe.net>
=
=Do you have any particular reason to think that "Dr. Sinister" was
=Septic? For all his deliberate nastiness, Dr. Sinister seemed quite
=intelligent, and appeared to have a considerable knowledge of
=Buddhism, neither of which is a quality Septic has ever displayed in
=any incarnation.
Note the spelling...
__________________________________________
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Mike Smith | aa #1164 | Founder of SMASH
__________________________________________
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing
in it, doesn't go away." -Philip K. Dick
Anti-Septic
Not Dr. Sinister. "Dr. Sinster" & "Dr. Sister" are
two of the many handles Septic has used over here.
raven1
Ah, I should have looked more closely, I see.
Mark Richardson
<donal...@skeptic.com> wrote:
>Goldhammer wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>Heh. Quite an extensive list, I forgot about
>some of these.
GoldHammer is *the* expert Skeptologist - you and I are mere amatuers
in comparison, Sniper old bean.
I used Goldhammers list as the springboard of my own reasearch.
> The only ones that I've noticed
>are missing, off hand, are "Todd Fields", and
>"Puzzling Evidence". How on earth did you manage
>to compile them all?
Todd Field is Skeptic, but I don't believe Puzzling evidence *is*.
Todd Field (toadfr...@hotmail.com)
6-Jun-2001
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.4.89.128
and later
toadfr...@hotmail.com (Todd Field)
4 Jun 2002
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.231.84.24
compare:
"Muddy Boggs" <muddy...@nospamhotmail.com>
03 Jun 2002
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.231.84.24
Puzzling evidence has no such "matches" - and he doesn't talk like
skeptic , doesn't rant on about Huxley etc.
I think you think he is Skeptic soley because he said:
<quote>
From: Puzzling Evidence (puzzling...@my-deja.com)
Subject: Re: All That is Essential to Atheism and Agnosticism
Newsgroups: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism
Date: 2001-03-02 18:28:24 PST
In article <3A9FDAA2...@netscape.net>, Hugh Betcha
<neth...@netscape.net> wrote:
>Is there anyone in these two newsgroups that hasn't seen what's been
>posted by Skeptic enough times now that they want to puke?
Yes. I'm happy to see Skeptic post the same stuff another thousand
times. It's
Sniper that I'm tired of reading.
<unquote>
So puzzling evidence - who addmitted :
<quote>
--
Puzzling Evidence / a.a. # not telling, but I'm on the list under a
different name
<unquote>
Is not Skeptic in my opinion.
Unless you have something better to go on?
I am going through GoldHammers post right now to see if his evidence
stacks up.
New Skeptology claims are a serious buisness and shouldnt be rushed.
8-)
Mark.
--
Mark Richardson mDOTrichardsonATutasDOTeduDOTau
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle aged Atheists with a Sense of Humour)
-----------------------------------------------------
Mark Richardson
wrote:
>On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:34:15 GMT, "Goldhammer"
><goldh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>"Dr. Sinster" <SkepticsN...@uunet.com>
>>"Dr. Sinster" <Slather-i...@alloverthe.net>
>
>Do you have any particular reason to think that "Dr. Sinister" was
>Septic?
No - Skeptic chose these names to mock Sinister.
Mark Richardson
<goldh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>Some of you are familiar with the
>Septic troll. Who is he, really?
>He is Donald R. Alford, of Bellingham, WA.
>
<snip>
Well done GoldHammer!
Very good research work.
If it was *just* the similarity in a few names that wouldn't be enough
- but the clincher (for me) is the Skeptic post where he talks about
"his railcars" - that and the post -out of the blue- from "Donald
Alford" to Fish telling him about a post on alt.atheism **about**
skeptics identity.
Wow!
Donald, can I still call you Muddy?
I always liked that one the best.
Anti-Septic
>
> On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:31:43 -0700, Anti-Septic
> <donal...@skeptic.com> wrote:
>
> >Goldhammer wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >Heh. Quite an extensive list, I forgot about
> >some of these.
>
> GoldHammer is *the* expert Skeptologist - you and I are mere amatuers
> in comparison, Sniper old bean.
Sad to say, but the guy's definately got more poop
on our resident ignoramus. He's done his research.
> I used Goldhammers list as the springboard of my own reasearch.
Ah, I wondered where you gathered the information.
True, it's all circumstantial, but I've never seen
anybody in their right mind defend Septic's rants.
> Unless you have something better to go on?
Nope. I'm probably just remembering that post.
> I am going through GoldHammers post right now to see if his evidence
> stacks up.
I've always wondered about Fish. Thought there
are some differences in David Trout's posts, I
had detected a certain "septicness" to them as
well. Here's a few in particular that I saved:
"I do not "have faith" that your god doesn't exist,
son; I *KNOW* that he doesn't." - Fish
"The one claiming the existence of something ALWAYS
bears the burden of proof. The one claiming something
DOESN'T exist NEVER bears the burden of proof." - Fish
raven1
OTOH, IIRC, David was very irate at the thought that people might
mistake him for Septic, and quite vehemently denied it, going so far
as to publicly apologize for even appearing to support him.
Anti-Septic
>
> On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 21:28:14 -0700, Anti-Septic
> <septi...@youknowit.com> wrote:
>
> >Mark Richardson wrote:
[snip]
> >> Puzzling Evidence / a.a. # not telling, but I'm on the list under a
> >> different name
> >> <unquote>
> >> Is not Skeptic in my opinion.
> >
> >True, it's all circumstantial, but I've never seen
> >anybody in their right mind defend Septic's rants.
> >
> >> Unless you have something better to go on?
> >
> >Nope. I'm probably just remembering that post.
> >
> >> I am going through GoldHammers post right now to see if his evidence
> >> stacks up.
> >
> >I've always wondered about Fish. Thought there
> >are some differences in David Trout's posts, I
> >had detected a certain "septicness" to them as
> >well. Here's a few in particular that I saved:
> >
> >"I do not "have faith" that your god doesn't exist,
> >son; I *KNOW* that he doesn't." - Fish
> >
> >"The one claiming the existence of something ALWAYS
> >bears the burden of proof. The one claiming something
> >DOESN'T exist NEVER bears the burden of proof." - Fish
>
> OTOH, IIRC, David was very irate at the thought that people might
> mistake him for Septic, and quite vehemently denied it, going so far
> as to publicly apologize for even appearing to support him.
Which might have been a clever ruse to make people
think they were _not_ the same person. Here's that
post, and he does appear to distance hinmself from
Septic, (although another post does the opposite).
Here's the post you're referring to, written after
Arno was outed for trolling under different names:
:Fish: In all sincerity, I am at this point deeply
:ashamed that I in times past ever stuck up for the
:mentally disturbed individual currently trolling as
:Septic/Dragon. With that in mind, please allow me to
:rectify this unfortunate past decision by formally and
:publicly denouncing at this time the Usenet persona
:known as Skeptic, Dick Dragon (and any others that may
:exist now or in the future). I refuse to be associated
:in any way whatsoever with such a blatantly dishonest
:and reprehensible asshole as him.
But then there was this one, which makes one wonder:
:Fish: I feel Skeptic is more or less right in what he's
:trying to say. He just may not be saying it very well
:because you guys are examining his words so precisely.
:I've run into the same problem in the past. I didn't
:know how to precisely and unambiguously (and yet
:accurately) state my position, so I did the best I
:could by using words that kinda sorta conveyed what I
:really meant....Perhaps the problem is simply that Skeptic
:chooses "presume", etc, because those words most accurately
:(to him) *connote* what he means (i.e. their connotation
:reflects what he really means), whereas you guys as examining
:his words in minute detail and echoing back what they actually
:*denote* (their actual denotation).....Please give him the
:benefit of the doubt, guys. He's not a dummy. He's just
:clumsy like I was (and oftentimes still am!).
Mark Richardson
<goldh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>Some of you are familiar with the
>Septic troll. Who is he, really?
>He is Donald R. Alford, of Bellingham, WA.
>
Hey Goldhammer!
On doing google searches on threads participated in by
donald...@email.msn.com I came across
" I M Notajoiner" <nos...@all.atall)>posting in 1998
the first few posts I investigated didnt seem very "Skeptic like"
But then this one:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=6sug7v%24rme%241%40ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
And he starts in on the behaviourist kick.
And in another:
<quote>
Notajoiner:
What I want is to have a high degree of certainty that what I think I
know is as close to objective truth as I can get, always keeping an
open mind for some new evidence that may come along. I don't have any
more choice in these matters than you or Crackmeup do, Shadwick. Our
degree of certainty is determined by contingent reinforcement, not
free will.
<unquote>
In another Frisbytarianism!
<quote>
Date: 1998/08/31
Dave Haas:
>... the truth ...
??
I am not a joiner, but I've been considering joining the
Frisbyterians. They
believe that when you die your soul just flies up onto the roof and
you
can't get it down.
<unquote>
And he post through EarthLink Network, Inc.
I think i found another one!
Also :
<quote>
From: Ace (dral...@pacificrim.net)
Subject: Re: I'm new and I want to know how much people read this
message
Newsgroups: news.newusers.questions
Date: 1995/11/17
Read your msg at Tony's Internet Cafe in Bellingham,
Washington, USA. 11-17-95 1300 PST.
Ace Netguide
<unquote>
I am on a roll!