Couple things (please note, I'm not taking sides on the issue. I'm playing devil's advocate).

1. If you Google well enough, he has some legitimate publications. Here's the FWD of his book: http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-94-011-5104-7%2F1.pdf Springer is a legitimate academic press.

2. Here's someone who wrote an actual academic review of his book: http://www.theassc.org/files/assc/2495.pdf

3. He's not a professor (as far as I can tell). It's not uncommon for people who aren't professors yet who did a PhD to only have a few (sometimes if any) publications.

4. I do get a gimmicky vibe from his blogs, but that's mostly because they're new and don't have much of a following (yet?). You've got to start somewhere.

5. His public track-record via Google is light, and what there is seems to be more focused on psychology/therapy/philosophy.

6. @ Greg: Bitcoin users have a healthy dose of skepticism and conspiratorial thoughts from its rich history scamming, so heat over credibility and identity comes with the territory.

7. @ Greg: If you do want to lend yourself some more credibility, you might consider posting a more formatted CV and list your publications (ideally with direct links to grab them).