Wednesday, December 15, 2010

I'll Bet John Thinks This Blog is About Him

John Loftus is doing a great job of ignoring me as he promised. That’s why he earned the nickname “The Man Who Wouldn’t Leave” on TheologyWeb, you see.

Anyway, John issued a snivel or two regarding Monday’s post in which he says:

He has recently brought up the same old accusations about me and embellished on them as the time goes by, even though I had already answered them as gross mischaracterizations at best, to outright lies.
No, John hasn’t “answered” them at all; he has made excuses and rationalizations for them – which John may think is an “answer,” but it is only so in the sense that he “replied”, in the same sense that “5” is an answer to “What is 2 plus 2.” They’re answers, but not ones useful for distancing himself from the title of Moral Toadstool of the Century.

And they’re not at all embellished. In fact, I can hardly “embellish” any of them since all but one offers direct quotes of John or links to the very acts in question. (The one I can’t find is where he gave a park worker the finger. But I doubt he’ll deny that happened.)

The two questions for his Christian supporters are as follows: 1) Why does he continue to repeat these old accusations when I have already reasonably answered them?

Because you haven’t “reasonably answered”, John. They’re still out there like sore thumbs. All you have done is pitiably rationalize these offenses with even more lies and obfuscations; the TWeb thread on the fake blog is a prime example of how you wheedle and wheeze when caught with your pants down. To wit:

Technically, I didn't lie.

Prove to me I did.

Besides, it doesn't matter that you know I started the Blog. I don't care. People will still visit there regardless, and I will continue sending people there.

You are the dishonest one.

John went on in this vein for several pages, despite repeated calls to admit his offense and repent. (Like he did with the adultery bit, you know. Ha ha.) This is what Loftus thinks constitutes “reasonable answering”. It is not. It is vain rationalization in which he digs the hole deeper, then shovels the dirt over himself to hide from the criticism.

2) Why doesn't he stick to the arguments?

I’ve done the arguments, John. I have complete responses done to three of your books. We have tons of stuff on you on TWeb. All you do at most is whine that we’re not seeing the forest for the trees. Besides, this comes from a guy who "sticks to the arguments" like hardened glue himself -- it's more than once he's linked to Brooks Trubee's "Holding Hate Site".

Further on in comments, John whines:

...I think Holding first got some attention for his verbal tactics by Farrell Till.

Nope, sorry. I first got attention on a major scale because my work was noted by high placed individuals. My material on Till has gotten virtually no traffic over the years. Because as I said last Friday, no one cares about Till except Till.

The problem I have now with him is that he focuses on me. He doesn't just have two blogs attacking me. He has three of them.
Beg pardon? I do have three blogs, but to say I “focus” on John is absurd. The Anti-Blog is a record of my daily activities, not a narrative blog with arguments, so I can hardly have a “focus” on John there. (Though it IS what is left of his fake blog, which I took over in a horse trade with him.)

The Forge blog here now has 42 posts, only 5 of which are about John, and that includes today’s. One is just a cartoon. Yeah, 10.3% of posts is a real "focus" on you, John. Just add the magnifying glass of Narcissus to see that one.

The Ticker has 44 posts as of this moment, NONE with John as their main subject (though he is mentioned briefly in a handful of posts because he is associated with the person who is the subject). Today's post, yet to come as of this typing, with not be about him either. Try adjusting the focus, John.

The newest catalog for Prometheus Books states that I am a leading atheist spokesman, whether that it true or not. Holding targets me more than others because I've become a lightning rod of sorts.

Nope. As noted, John isn’t targeted more than others. Fantasy on.
It’s like that old song…how did it go?

You’re so vain…I bet you think this blog is about you…


  1. He could be thinking about which isn't even your blog.

  2. If so, he's already been told at least three times that it isn't mine. Which doesn't make him look any smarter than usual.

  3. @J. P Holding:
    Perhaps it's because the last five posts in that blog came from you.

  4. True, but he has been told directly (on TWeb) that it is not mine.

  5. And note how rarely that blog is updated.

  6. Probably 100 times less often than he checks it.