I did reference one piece of evidence, if you review the comments on this page (it's not a lot of research to ask of you). You can look at his first post. He gave his explanation for why it wasn't a scam. You can make your own judgment about his explanation.

But from my point of view, his explanation rings very hollow. That's in part because of other things he's said, not just that one post. Even in the comments on this page, I find him to be continuously disingenuous in his comments. His proponents will explain such behavior as him just trying to trigger emotional reactions, etc. But I don't think such reasoning provides a defense for lying.

I have a lot of experience dealing with and recognizing the behavior of scammy individuals as opposed to the casual liar, and his behavior matches well with that of many scammers I've met in the past. They use a mix of truth and lies to try to get people to believe their lies. They come up with bullshit excuses whenever their lies are pointed out. They also quickly try to redirect from the issue being raised and spend most of their writing time on personal attacks, make grandiose claims, etc.

There's more to the pattern recognition my brain uses to identify such individuals that I can explain simply, because it is a pattern recognition process that goes on somewhat subconsciously (this latter claim from me may sound fantastic to you, but I'm trying to be as honest as possible with you about how it works for me), but I hope the points in the previous paragraph above give you some idea how I go about coming to such conclusions.

It's difficult to prove conclusively that someone is a scam artist, it's generally a judgement call. But I continue to hold this judgment about him, based on the evidence I have available to me.