The academic establishment is known to use very long official terms. It is also known to claim things on the lines of "dogma X has not been disproven, it has only been modified" and to say that "this theory is not the same theory as it was", forcing people to use even longer explanations of what they mean. This serves the purpose of forcing critics to choose between a technically correct mastodont-longeur that puts readers/listeners off/makes them lose track of the actual information content, and a concise explanation that the academic establishment can call "ignorant" or "crackpot".

One way out of this dilemma is to give the formal definition explanations and disclaimers different colors or character sizes, so that those who want to demand technical correctness of terms can read it but other readers do not have to in order to read the rest of the text. This clearly gives the academic establishment motifs for denigrating color-coded and character size-coded text.

Considering that the "sceptic" community is known for its notorious habit to make parodies, such as the "FUN: " articles on Rational Wiki, it is very likely that TimeCube is a parody created by undercover "sceptics". It may well have been created exactly for the purpose of creating an association fallacy lumping color-coded and character size-coded text with complete bullshit. So various "sceptics" pooled the silliest parodies they could come up with and created the TimeCube "theory", which they then wrote in a color-coded and character size-coded style to create that association fallacy. Knowing that such an extreme nonsense would not get any followers, especially considering that it calls people idiots, and likely also to avoid that someone could infer the "sceptic" origin from the composition of the group, they decided to use a single person (it happened to be Gene Ray) as a sock puppet instead of publishing it as a group.

The fact that Gene Ray was once allowed to hold a speech at a university supports the theory that he is being used as an instrument by an academic conspiracy.

See also Intelligent design movement hoax by Darwinists.