Craig Wright to provide 'extraordinary' proof he is the creator of Bitcoin

Australian entrepreneur Craig Wright, who recently revealed himself as the supposed creator of Bitcoin widely known by the online pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, is planning to provide proof to substantiate his claim.

On 2 May, Wright revealed his identity to a few media organisations claiming he invented the cryptocurrency. It was met with immediate scepticism and in an attempt to back up his claims he provided a proof by signing a signature using private keys on early Bitcoin blocks. While several renowned members of the Bitcoin community as well as its development team have confirmed his claims, some were still asking for more proof.

Now, on Wright's own website he has written a blog post entitled 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof' with Wright saying he would present extraordinary proof to support his claim.

He wrote, "So, over the coming days, I will be posting a series of pieces that will lay the foundation for the extraordinary claim, which will include posting independently verifiable documents and evidence addressing some of the false allegation that have been levelled, and transferring Bitcoin from an early block."

"For some there is no burden of proof high enough, no evidence that cannot be dismissed as fabrication or manipulation. This is the nature of belief and swimming against this would be futile."

The initial signature posted by Craig Wright was described on Github as "flimflam and hokum which stands up to a few minutes of cursory scrutiny, and demonstrates a competent sysadmin's level of familiarity with cryptographic tools, but ultimately demonstrates no non-public information about Satoshi."

Speaking to BBC, Craig Wright's spokesman told BBC, the Australian would "move a coin from an early block" known to belong to the crypto-currency's inventor "in the coming days".

Jon Matonis, a senior director at the Bitcoin Foundation, said although he is convinced by Craig Wright, his blog posting failed to help his case. "It needs to be amended because it's not conclusive for the general public. But that does not take away from what I saw in private," said Matonis.