Justin Smith wrote:
When one reads claims like
it is only logical to ask the claimant for sources so readers can be assured the person isn't just spreading gossip.
And both of those claims I got from unrelated native Taiwanese sources, who probably wouldn't want me to use their names. Enough so that I'm fairly sure of what I'm saying. Now Robert Smith has been caught out by a number of people by making deliberate or ..perhaps.. unintentional errors in his "books", i.e., "sources". The question I'm asking you is what your "scholarship" demands for a book "source" have to do with the truth, in reality? Even "written sources" have as much to question as spoken sources, so either you're not capable of reasoning or you're caught up in some dreamworld.
I say, once again, that you are some troubled Cheng Man Chinger cult addict who is simply out to bizarrely chase *one* person (and if you think you're somehow not as obvious as daylight to just about everyone on the forum, you need a reality check). So your call for "sources" does nothing but allow you to keep wasting time, unless you can come to some point or perhaps brave yourself to speak honestly about what is on your mind.
Notice that I don't go into some of your "sources" who claimed "in writing" what Cheng's credentials were. I actually have been privy to a lot more blunt conversations about Cheng's past than I'm talking about and from very reputable sources. I say it again... Cheng made no really spectacular BS claims about himself. His purported "students" are the ones making the bogus claims and hence ruining Cheng's name.