To be scientifically exact, there is a faint possibility that some extremely clever people might have tediously faked some of those personalities completely - but for what secret agenda? In the eyes of a good observer, most of the bickerers effectively work for the opposite agenda they claim, thus neutralizing each other. (It seems clear though that Conc is indeed a fake by one of our crusaders.)

To be scientifically exact, you need evidence. Now here's your problem. You find people here who are at odds with your rather prosaic, conventional world view. So they must be mentally ill, on too much wine or faking their identities. Here's a hint for you, old chap(ess). Dump your loser's sour grapes, do a bit more homework, leave your baggage at the door and engage the arguments. It's much more fun than whatever it is you seem to be doing. To be scientifically inexact.