Freethought & Rationalism Archive

James Brown · 10-16-2009, 09:48 AM

I've searched Wiki for Holding and Turkel and don't seem to find who you all are talking about.

Clivedurdle · 10-16-2009, 09:50 AM

I meant someone write one....

Deus Ex · 10-16-2009, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

I've searched Wiki for Holding and Turkel and don't seem to find who you all are talking about.

You have to check with Conservapedia, not that Satanic Wikipedia:

http://www.conservapedia.com/JP_Holding

:devil1:

Clivedurdle · 10-16-2009, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Below I offer a list of 17 factors to be considered

From con above.

Heresy! Holding is into numerology!

It is actually reminiscent of Dake - he - a hundred years ago - had lists of "five reasons why, 283 proofs of...

Is this argument by powerpoint?

Ktotwf · 10-16-2009, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Ex

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

I've searched Wiki for Holding and Turkel and don't seem to find who you all are talking about.

You have to check with Conservapedia, not that Satanic Wikipedia:

http://www.conservapedia.com/JP_Holding

:devil1:

I'm ashamed of it, but after reading that article I can't help but feel a little bit more like Conservative America in general and the religious right specifically are our intractable enemies. Not people with whom we disagree - enemies.

Toto · 10-16-2009, 10:19 AM

Go to www.infidels.org and search for Holding or Turkel. You will find a wealth of material, such as

James Patrick Holding, the Want-to-Be Apologist by Farrell Till 2002 / July-August (a little out of date, of course)

You can also search this forum and the BCH archives for more. Holding now has legally changed his name to J P Holding from Robert Turkel, and he has entered a program to become a minister, as opposed to an amateur internet apologist.

Holding's website is tektonics.org, but he is charging for some of his content now. This has probably cut down on his influence.

There is a website collecting replies to him at http://the-anointed-one.com/exposed.html
(I just noticed that this website has some dead links to Earl Doherty's old website.)

Holding's trademark has been continuous insults, combined with parodies of people's names. You can occasionally find some good information in his material, or at least a point that deserves to be taken seriously, but you have to weed out a lot of gratuitous blather.

Of course, this thread is defeating its own purpose of ignoring Holding. But what can you do?

Toto · 10-16-2009, 10:32 AM

Conservapedia Talk Page

Quote:

JP Holding has a number of cranks who obssess over him. Even one of his atheist critics at TheologyWeb stated that some individuals have "JPHOCD" which stands for JP Holding Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

I can't locate that critic - the only one using that term seems to be JP himself. But he would probably use this thread as evidence of JPHOCD.

Roger Pearse · 10-16-2009, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ktotwf

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I feel as if I come to this part way through, but a couple of thoughts:

If what he says is wrong, wouldn't rational refutation be better than running opinion polls?

You'd think that. Any rational, sane human being would think that.

However, in a situation where a person loses a debate, refuses to admit defeat, and then proceeds to get personal and insulting, what choice do you have? Rational discourse relies on the unspoken assumption that the people taking part are adults who can admit defeat like a true intellectual would.

Turkel is especially nasty in that he engages in rampant intellectual dishonesty, and oftentimes will refuse to link to transcripts of debates where he was creamed, etc.

While this sounds reasonable, I have to tell you that I have seen this type of excuse for abuse frequently deployed by the dirtiest posters online. Somehow it is always the other guy's fault that trolls A, B and C are screaming abuse like whoresons; and the rational, courteous, sane response never appears, or is always somewhere else. It is simply too easy an argument.

Indeed I have seen it make an appearance, simply because one side of an argument will not accept the arguments of the other side, however angry they get, even though those arguments are clearly merely assertions or fallacies.

So... no. It doesn't work for me. In my experience, when someone has a killer argument, obvious to all, they deploy it and adopt an air of weary patient courtesy. After all, what better way to win the audience?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 10-16-2009, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Of course, this thread is defeating its own purpose of ignoring Holding. But what can you do?

Make better arguments, and adopt a line of relentless courtesy.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto · 10-16-2009, 12:09 PM

I don't think that better arguments are needed - I don't think that Holding has made any valid points.

There is a recording of a debate between Ken Hemphreys and JP Holding that is available (I think there is an old thread on this.) It is interesting - Humpreys is quite congenial and polite, and Holding doesn't seem to know what to say.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-16-2009, 09:48 AM	#21
James Brown Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Texas, U.S. Posts: 5,844	I've searched Wiki for Holding and Turkel and don't seem to find who you all are talking about.

10-16-2009, 09:50 AM	#22
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	I meant someone write one....

10-16-2009, 10:19 AM	#26
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Go to www.infidels.org and search for Holding or Turkel. You will find a wealth of material, such as James Patrick Holding, the Want-to-Be Apologist by Farrell Till 2002 / July-August (a little out of date, of course) You can also search this forum and the BCH archives for more. Holding now has legally changed his name to J P Holding from Robert Turkel, and he has entered a program to become a minister, as opposed to an amateur internet apologist. Holding's website is tektonics.org, but he is charging for some of his content now. This has probably cut down on his influence. There is a website collecting replies to him at http://the-anointed-one.com/exposed.html (I just noticed that this website has some dead links to Earl Doherty's old website.) Holding's trademark has been continuous insults, combined with parodies of people's names. You can occasionally find some good information in his material, or at least a point that deserves to be taken seriously, but you have to weed out a lot of gratuitous blather. Of course, this thread is defeating its own purpose of ignoring Holding. But what can you do?

10-16-2009, 12:09 PM	#30
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I don't think that better arguments are needed - I don't think that Holding has made any valid points. There is a recording of a debate between Ken Hemphreys and JP Holding that is available (I think there is an old thread on this.) It is interesting - Humpreys is quite congenial and polite, and Holding doesn't seem to know what to say.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.