Well, I am not a nihilist. I am a skeptic, that is different.
But if you want really what to play that game, then okay.
To my knowledge, Friedrich Nietzsche defines Nihilism as rejecting an obvious truth, like 2+2=4.
It is Nihilism to reply "there are no proofs'' without reporting mistakes.
Otherwise, it is crazy trolling and bullying, like in the case against Jesus:
"If I said something wrong, show what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth,
why did you strike Me?'' John 18:23.
I have proofs because I was trying to write mathematical proofs, not a
description of how to castrate a cat or something. I explicitly put the word
``proof'' into the text. This proof is unpublished yet, but it is a valid
proof until mistakes are reported. Please do not reply to me in such a
Nihilistic, discriminatory way, saying:
"You have no proof, not because we have a report of mistakes, but because
we do not trust you. We rely only upon famous authors and professors of
mathematics. The well-known scientific problems are not for you. They are for
famous, established authors only."
It is natural for ordinary persons to feel distrust and rejection against an
unfamiliar, low score, unpublished author because the true information
must come from a trustworthy source. This condition for the validity of
information has already been described in the first century:
"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?'' John 1:46. But this
self-protection instinct is abnormal for scientific journals