This blog is driving Loftus crazy. John just can't seem to handle the fact that JPH is on Blogger now (well, as been for a while as a matter of fact), and now refers to us implicitally. I'm sure there are other sites on John's mind, a few I don't like myself (Debunking Atheists is one example), but you know that most of what John speaks of is right here. He uses the same hints of language as he's posted here on some of these posts of mine. Now, he's safe in his retreat where he can lash out at us some more:
From time to time a friend will send me a link to a site that attempts to deal with an argument of mine. I'm glad people are thinking and attempting to deal with my arguments, of course. But some of these sites are filled with so many obvious straw man type arguments, non-sequiturs, either/or fallacies, and/or ad hominems that it amazes me these writers actually think they've considered my arguments at all. I don't think this is just a matter of believers who are blinded by their faith, although that's certainly a factor. It's that they cannot think. There are rules for thinking critically and these people cannot do it.
In any case, when I see these types of sites I figure it won't do any good to respond because if they couldn't think critically in their first post they won't be able to do so a second time in response to my comment.
All that John does here is give us a grocery list of unmentioned "non-sequitirs" and "ad-hominens." Gee, I guess John didn't think about that one while he called me an asshole, now didn't he (he still hasn't explained what he means by the word, btw)? Or how about the "sewer forum" he visits on occasion? Whatever happened to John detesting JP so much he couldn't stand him, or us for the matter? Where does John get off with these statements? Where is the rationality in them; it's nonexistent.
Funny enough people still are willing to be convinced by John that it would have to be the responsibility of this blog to spell out everything in black and white ink. John's irrationality is so much that often words don't do any justice, yet people still buy into him and go along with it.
John's "hit and run" tactics remind me very much of household cats. I'll let the late George Carlin explain if you don't know why already:
Saturday, March 14, 2009
8 comments:
If you are unaware of the rules on comments, please consult this post for more information.
Complaints and suggestions about the blog's comment moderation policies should be addressed here.
READ BEFORE POSTING: Do not post comments if they do not deal with the topic addressed in our posts and ESPECIALLY if they deal with pointing out the hypocricy of Christians and the flaws of the Christian religion. This is not about issues of sensitivity but maintaining an atmosphere of freshness and relevant discourse. ANYONE posting these comments (in the event they do NOT deal with the topics we have introduced) will have their comments deleted without warning. Post with care and attention to this simple request, thank you.
NOTE: This blog mirrors Debunking Christianity in that we allow only registered users of Blogger and Google accounts in commenting on our web pages. Anonymous commentators are not permitted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
So for those of us who are uninformed, what's your gripe with John? Is it the fact that he left the Christian faith or the reasons you think he left it? Is it because you find his arguments and lines of reasoning wanting? Did he offend you personally in some way? Or do you just find him arrogant and someone who should be put in his place?
ReplyDeleteI understand that religion and faith are very deeply personal things for most people, so I get the defensive posturing and passion behind the expression of these views. I'm not sure I get the dislike of any one person in particular.
So for those of us who are uninformed, what's your gripe with John? Is it the fact that he left the Christian faith or the reasons you think he left it? Is it because you find his arguments and lines of reasoning wanting?
ReplyDeleteLeave out the fact about John's apostasy, and you just spelled out my reasons for disdain. It's rather unfortunate that John's louderspeaker of communication has reached as wide as it has.
Someone who violates the protocol set by a belief system does not mean that a person should use the belief system as a justification for their actions. Quite the opposite, as you might expect. John and his associates aren't really different than fundamentalist Christians, they just happen to wear different hats.
TbT,
ReplyDeleteJust what the hell are you trying to acieve here?
You definitely are fixated on this Loftus dude.
This is some crazy shit.
JLs blog makes this place look like crazy town, and you are the mayor.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you have against Dan at "Debunking Atheists?"
ReplyDeleteYou definitely are fixated on this Loftus dude.
ReplyDeleteThis is some crazy shit.
Yes...I mean, if John is going to make statements like this, he should expect some clarity to pop up if he's not going to provide it himself. He lables my blog as full of non-sequitirs and ad-hominens but fails to explain what those labels can be attributed too and doesn't even look in the mirror for starters!
JLs blog makes this place look like crazy town, and you are the mayor.
Are you SURE about that? Just go take a look at Harry's comments on here. He practically brags with getting away with delibrately unethical actions in the court system. He also brags about his harrassment of Holding's spouse at her workplace, which is also a federal institution. I'd say that's quite an extreme statement without taking into account all of the factors that are to be compared.
What do you have against Dan at "Debunking Atheists?"
I'm not sure what you mean. I don't even know Dan, I just took a glance at his blog and thought it wasn't really worth an endorsement from me. Not that it matters a great deal or anything.
But I don't have anything "against" this person. I don't know him, how can I be against him? I guess you could say that partially applies to Lofty, but I do know him to an extent. I've heard that he's quite different in person but he has yet to show whatever positive qualities he exhibits here on the internet. Allot of it is just dodging owning up for himself and finding ways to spin the topic onto his retractor, that usually being JP Holding.
a few I don't like myself (Debunking Atheists is one example)
ReplyDeleteHey, I heard that. :)
I hope we all understand it is not about us, it is about Jesus Christ.
Hi Dan.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't interested in starting anything with you when I said that, so hopefully there isn't anything that has lead you to take that in that sort of direction.
You're right, it's not about us. Truly and honestly, it's not even about Loftus. The grand scope of things is how we deal with each other by learning to grasp new meaning and understanding from foreign ideas and not claiming superiority over the other. This is Loftus' dilemma, but Loftus is just one example in a sea of many that have become so militant it hasn't really cleared away the fundamentalist gunk they once had. Nope, it's still there...
Anyways Dan, welcome to the new blog. :)