Do You Want to See Me Do "Live Debate"?

[jpholding]

"Lazy Agnostic" (aka the King of JPHOCD) seems to think that my "sycophants" (that's you) would like to see me do live debate, as opposed to keeping things in written form. So let's see what kind of feedback we get.

You may only respond if you are a "sycophant" of mine. I know some of the atheists want this, for their own perverse purposes. :teeth:

[Piebald]

Card-Carrying Tekton Sycophant #32584.4 here.

It might be interesting. Written debates are superior, though.

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

Er, no. I don't want to see JP doing live debate, it keeps him from studying in the library.

:smile:

[Lizard]

I voted Burritos. :yummy:

Live debates are, for the most part, style over substance. JPH, has no style, so he better stick to substance. :wink:

(Of course JPH knows that I am only jokin, he has style AND substance. I am a devoted sychophant, plese don't kick me out of the sychophant club.)

[Darth Executor]

Yes, only because I want to see JP embarrass some fool live.

[spiritmech]

Eh. I couldn't care either way. I don't expect to really get much out of a live debate ... most of the times these things just have both people already decided on their position and it's just jabbering.

JPH has put himself out there for the world to see and you can judge him that way. It's in written form, it's on the web, so you should be able to make your conclusions from that.

Maybe if JPH looked like Katie Holmes or if he had dreadlocks it might be more interesting.

sm

[Bill the Cat]

Yes, only because I want to see JP embarrass some fool live.
syncophant?? No sir not me... Tektonics.org is not #1 on my favorite list... it is not my home page... :hyper:

I'd like to see you debate live, but do you want to do one?

[jpholding]

Maybe if JPH looked like Katie Holmes or if he had dreadlocks it might be more interesting.


I look like a cross between the male lead in the movie Not Without My Daughter and Lt. Worf.


Er, no. I don't want to see JP doing live debate, it keeps him from studying in the library.

A critical point. Timewise even solo speaking engagements are a huge investment.

[Meh_Gerbil]

The problem with live debate is that the opposition can make stuff up on the fly (pull stuff outta context, misquote, etc) and 'win' without you really getting a chance to call them on it. They'd take any stumbling around you'd do to establish context as incompetence.

With a written debate you don't get 'I didn't say that' and all that nonsense.

[Higon]

Here´s my Id sir.

Unless you plan to record and upload the debate, I´d rather have some nachos. :tongue:

[jpholding]

Here´s my Id sir.

Egad! Can I keep that and post it on the front page?

There's irony in it too, because as a preterist I believe the "rapture" is actually the final resurrection, so that essentially means NEVER. :lol:

In return, I will give you not nachos, but my recipe for pico de gallo.




MG's point has been emphasized for me by the Licona-Carrier debate. Both men looked good in the first two rounds because they had agreed to show each other their opening statements days beforehand. But in the third round both were full of "uhs" and "ums" and other stumbles (though Carrier shaped himself up by just continuing with new presentation material he had prepared beforehand).

And both apologized at least once for not having time to get into certain critical points...

[Cynic Sage]

"Lazy Agnostic" (aka the King of JPHOCD) seems to think that my "sycophants" (that's you) would like to see me do live debate, as opposed to keeping things in written form. So let's see what kind of feedback we get.

You may only respond if you are a "sycophant" of mine. I know some of the atheists want this, for their own perverse purposes. :teeth:

I see absolutely no good reason why you should have a live debate. The skeptics who challenge you to live debate are making themselves look foolish because...

1) There's nothing that can be accomplished in live debate that can't be accomplished better in a written debate (short of refuting one's opponent in song and interpretive-dance).

2) More research can be accomplished with regards to written responses to opening statements.

3) The Audience (save those illiterate and/or with small browser font) find the debate easier to follow, being able to re-read sections of debate.

4) Watch CNN's CrossFire. I rest my case.

It is as if they want a handicap. I would say the same thing if xtians were pressuring an internet infidel to do live debate as opposed to written. Yeesh.:rant:

[Piebald]

Watch CNN's CrossFire.

It's been canceled. Now you may rest your case.

[Trout]

If it were against LA . . . :yes:

[Cynic Sage]

If it were against LA . . . :yes:

:no: I don't know if it would be a good idea for him to compromise. Someone could take a picture of JP during the debate, then Ted Bell would probably photoshop JP's face onto the head of a guy doing something nasty to a goat or something like that.

[Darth Executor]

:no: I don't know if it would be a good idea for him to compromise. Someone could take a picture of JP during the debate, then Ted Bell would probably photoshop JP's face onto the head of a guy doing something nasty to a goat or something like that.

LA wants a phone debate IIRC.

[spiritmech]

Watch CNN's CrossFire.

It's been canceled. Now you may rest your case.

JPH + bow tie would be hard to argue against.
sm

[Darth Executor]

Here's a rough draft of what JP looks like with a tie.

[Sparko]

I was kinda torn between tacos and burritos so I voted "no! its a trick JP"

Personally the better public speaker usually wins live debates, not the best information.

I rather see written debates so I can cut and paste them! :yes:

But if you did want to do a live debate, Pal Talk might be a good venue. Then people could ask questions of the participants and it still could be moderated.

[Darth Executor]

I can't understand a word people say on paltalk.

[Wildcat]

I enjoy oral debates for their entertainment value, but unfortunately I'm not sure that they're very good for anything other than entertainment. The reasons are essentially those noted above by Johnny EC, though to that list I'll add (in conjunction w/ Faramir) that style plays too much of a role in live debates. The person that merely *sounds* more confident, or even talks (or yells) the loudest may be enough to sway at least some in the crowd. Plus, I've noticed that soundbites, often that are not supported w/ adequate data, are typically well-received, and that's obviously not a good thing.

In live debates, there is often not ample time for one debater to address all of the points of his/her opponent, and vice versa, which adds a certain level of frustration to all of the live debates I've watched or listened to. This is not a problem in written debates, as each side has (usually) an unlimited amount of time and space to address anything that needs to be addressed. Each side has time to go to the library, get as many books as may be necessary, and check up on his/her opponent's sources. This is quite obviously not the case in live, oral debates.

Furthermore, I think that it is actually MUCH easier to "get away" with fabrications and other forms of skulduggery in live debates than in written ones, the reason being once again the "time and resources" factor. In most cases, it takes research and "source-checking" to confirm that some kind of deception or chicanery is taking place. This usually can't be done within the short time-frame of an oral debate.

Two books that I'd recommend which I think are relevant to this issue would be Paul Copan's "Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?" and "Jesus' Resurrection: Fact or Figment?". Both books center around debates by William Lane Craig, the former being against Dominic Crossan, and the latter against Gerd Ludemann. Both are available at Amazon. Each book contains the transcript of the respective debates followed by 4 essays by various NT scholars (in each case, 2 that affirm the rez, and 2 that deny it), with follow-up essays by both debaters at the end that respond to various criticisms made by the 4 scholars. The reason I'd recommend these books in regards to this issue is because I find that they exemplify the vast superiority of written essays/debates to live, oral debates. While the different written essays contributed to each book (including those at the end by the two debaters) were well-organized and expressed well the points each author wanted to argue, the transcripts from the oral debates often suffered from a lack of detail and inadequate attention paid to the other side's points.

It would be entertaining to watch or listen to JPH perform a live debate, and I think he'd do quite well, but it would be (due to the factors discussed) virtually impossible for him (or his opponent!) to adequately discuss and expound all of the relevant details of pretty much any debate topic in such a format. My recommendation would thus be to stick with the written debates.

Wildcat.

[Taran Wanderer]

"Lazy Agnostic" (aka the King of JPHOCD) seems to think that my "sycophants" (that's you) would like to see me do live debate, as opposed to keeping things in written form. So let's see what kind of feedback we get.
I voted no. A live debate might be fun if you're as entertaining on your feet as you are in writing, but I agree with the reasons you and others have given against it. I certainly wouldn't want to substitute a live debate for a written one.

You may only respond if you are a "sycophant" of mine. I know some of the atheists want this, for their own perverse purposes. :teeth:
Have they given any reasons for wanting one? I'd like to know what deficiencies they think writing has that could be remedied by extemporaneous speaking.

[Sparko]

hey JP you ought to come into Pal Talk tonight (room theologyweb chat!) and see what you think. we have plenty of loons that wander in througout the night and we could have a "stay in the ring with JP for 3 minutes" contest. heheheh.

The Tweb pal talk room is open from 8PM eastern us, till whenever, friday through sunday.

[Captain Ochre]

Johnny EC nailed it. It would be fun to see JP debate live--and I think he'd do okay for himself--but the written debate format is the better deal, and JP would be frankly reckless to give up his obvious strengths (research) in favor of stepping into a venue that is so given to soundbite.
No, JP should not sacrifice written debate in favor of oral debate.
It might be worth exploring oral debate, however.
1) More people might become familiar with Tektonics Ministries.
2) Nothing but a silly debate rule could keep JP from doing a written analysis of the oral debate. It's conceivable that JP could misspeak as to certain topics, but it seems to me simply setting the record straight in writing would be a suitable antidote for the reasonable person ... and JP shouldn't overly concern himself over the unreasonable person.

My two cents, anyway.

[jpholding]

Have they given any reasons for wanting one? I'd like to know what deficiencies they think writing has that could be remedied by extemporaneous speaking.

LA refuses to answer this question with more than vague pap like, "It would be interesting."


hey JP you ought to come into Pal Talk tonight (room theologyweb chat!) and see what you think. we have plenty of loons that wander in througout the night and we could have a "stay in the ring with JP for 3 minutes" contest. heheheh.

Aside from that evenings are reserved for time with the family (the Mrs. and Toby -- on tap tonight, a new local Chinese buffet that looks promising) I don't have a microphone....

[Abigail]

My youngest son is crazy about dogs he's like to see Toby do a live debate please

[Sparko]

LA refuses to answer this question with more than vague pap like, "It would be interesting."



Aside from that evenings are reserved for time with the family (the Mrs. and Toby -- on tap tonight, a new local Chinese buffet that looks promising) I don't have a microphone....

What? you dare to spend time with family? where is your dedication? I am so disapointed in you. I am not sure if I can be a psychophant of yours any more.

And go out and buy a microphone, fer crying out loud. They are cheap.

[Higon]

Egad! Can I keep that and post it on the front page?

There's irony in it too, because as a preterist I believe the "rapture" is actually the final resurrection, so that essentially means NEVER. :lol:

In return, I will give you not nachos, but my recipe for pico de gallo.

Of course you can use it. I was aware of your escathological position and thought it would be a nice touch. :teeth: Also there´s this nice looking Darwin picture, ´cause you know, Darwin is never enough.

[Pate]

I'm a big fan of oral debates because of their entertainment value. Of course one can learn much more by reading a written debate or a good and informative book on the subject, but that kind of objection against oral debates as such kind of misses the point of them. They should be seen as educational form of entertainment, and not as some authoritative means of finding the truth. I'd say that a good debate can be at least as entertaining as a good movie, and the educational value should be seen as an added bonus. But think of it this way: if we would get the average Christian to cut down by 50% the time spent viewing movies or some brainless tv-shows and get them to use that time watching and listening to debates by William Lane Craig etc, even that would have a dramatic impact on the way that Christians would be able to defend their faith. But of course the impact would be even bigger if they'd throw the Left Behind-series books in the garbage can and read some Wright, Plantinga and Swinburne instead.

So, in answer to the question, yes, I'd like to see JP in an oral debate, if he sees it as something worth doing, but it's not any kind of necessity, as I can surely learn more from his written articles and get my entertainment from other debaters.

[jpholding]

My youngest son is crazy about dogs he's like to see Toby do a live debate please

Toby agrees. Please find a suitable opponent, preferably a kitty he can chase a bit, bark at, and then leave alone when honor is satisfied.



What? you dare to spend time with family? where is your dedication? I am so disapointed in you. I am not sure if I can be a psychophant of yours any more.

Uh oh...now you made my wife and dog mad. They want your address. I should warn you that she used to beat up the boys in her neighborhood....


Thank you, Higon! Here is my recipe for pico de gallo, excellent for nachos esp. with beef and cheddar cheese:

3 whole tomatoes, with the juices squeezed out
1 green onion
1/2 of a red onion
1 tbsp lime juice
2 jalapeno peppers (or make it habaneros if you're brave)
fresh cilantro, at least a handful

If you have a food processor, throw it in and chop it all up together; or dice it all up as much as you can and mix it together.

[$cirisme]

You may only respond if you are a "sycophant" of mine. I know some of the atheists want this, for their own perverse purposes

Crap. Sorry, I already voted.

[jpholding]

Crap. Sorry, I already voted.

S'OK. The "sycophants" part is meant to be ironic, in terms of how LA would portray you. Any Christian who simply respects my work is welcome to vote.

[Darth Executor]

3 whole tomatoes, with the juices squeezed out

BLASPHEMY! :rock:

[Cynic Sage]

Toby agrees. Please find a suitable opponent, preferably a kitty he can chase a bit, bark at, and then leave alone when honor is satisfied.


I wonder if Farrell Till has a Cat...

[dizzle]

JP you should have made it so one could see who voted for what, though we all hope for the honour system, we had a poll once in the science area that clearly said only one group should vote and it wasn't followed

[Darth Executor]

JP you should have made it so one could see who voted for what, though we all hope for the honour system, we had a poll once in the science area that clearly said only one group should vote and it wasn't followed

I can guarantee the guidelines were probably followed. I'm the only one who voted yes and I'm one of JP's sycophants.

[anthrogirl]

my "sycophants" (that's you) would like to see me do live debate, as opposed to keeping things in written form. So let's see what kind of feedback we get.



don't care.

ag

[jpholding]

JP you should have made it so one could see who voted for what, though we all hope for the honour system, we had a poll once in the science area that clearly said only one group should vote and it wasn't followed

I did put a check mark in that box. :rant:


BLASPHEMY

Suit yerself. If you don't do it, your pico will be runny, and that is an abomination.

[BeHereNow]

I voted tacos because I'm in my 3rd month in Korea right now and I'm seriously going through taco withdrawal. It's not a joke. PLEASE!!! GIVE ME TACOS!

That said, I agree wholely (?) with Pate. There's no need for a live debate, but I do enjoy live debates. I'd imagine that you, JP, could dominate just as easily live as you could in writing.

[jpholding]

I voted tacos because I'm in my 3rd month in Korea right now and I'm seriously going through taco withdrawal. It's not a joke. PLEASE!!! GIVE ME TACOS!

You can't even buy kits at the store and make your own? :huh: Jeepers! Remind me not to go to Korea!

Thanks for the input. :thumb:

[C. D. Ward]

Thank you, Higon! Here is my recipe for pico de gallo, excellent for nachos esp. with beef and cheddar cheese:

3 whole tomatoes, with the juices squeezed out
1 green onion
1/2 of a red onion
1 tbsp lime juice
2 jalapeno peppers (or make it habaneros if you're brave)
fresh cilantro, at least a handful

If you have a food processor, throw it in and chop it all up together; or dice it all up as much as you can and mix it together.
Hey, that's almost the same as MY recipe except that I use roma tomatoes (not as acidic), & leave out the green onion (and sometimes add a little tequila).

And I recommend dicing by hand; the food processor just rips everything up and it gets too "juicy"...

OT: I vote "no"*. Oral debates aren't generally worth the paper on which they're transcribed.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* unless JP & opponent both agree to wear black tie, tails, and do a little soft-shoe routine (you know, a little "theo for two and two for theo...") between rounds in order to up the ante on the entertainment value...

[jpholding]

Hey, that's almost the same as MY recipe except that I use roma tomatoes (not as acidic), & leave out the green onion (and sometimes add a little tequila).

If that's the same as plum tomatoes, that's what I use too. How much tequila? I can't see more than a teaspoon working per small bowl without making it too runny.

And I recommend dicing by hand; the food processor just rips everything up and it gets too "juicy"...

I solved that by cutting the tops off the tomatoes and squeezing them out before I put 'em in the chopper. :teeth: Makes a mess in the sink, but hey, who cares?

OT: I vote "no"*. Oral debates aren't generally worth the paper on which they're transcribed.

I thank you. Unfortunately Toby does not like for anyone else in the house to wear black, because it draws attention to his unfortunate secret.* How about a Croc Dundee imitation, or championship wrestling?










---------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Under all that black fur, he's actually pink.

[Cynic Sage]

How about a Croc Dundee imitation, or championship wrestling?

Has the ship sailed on the whole "freestyle rhyme-busting" thang?

[Higon]

Has the ship sailed on the whole "freestyle rhyme-busting" thang?

Now that´s a great suggestion! The moto should be: Ancient Near East freestyle rhyme-busting: a contest with context!

[BeHereNow]

You can't even buy kits at the store and make your own? :huh: Jeepers! Remind me not to go to Korea!

Actually, I heard a rumor that a local superstore just started carrying taco kits. No news on whether or not I'd be able to find cheese, ground beef, or refried beans anywhere within a 100-mile radius, though.

Tacos.

Mmmm.... Lots of lettuce, crisp, cold and warm intermingled....

Thanks for the input. :thumb:

Hey, let us know if anything happens. I hope it's d/l'able.

[BeHereNow]

Now that´s a great suggestion! The moto should be: Ancient Near East freestyle rhyme-busting: a contest with context!

I would pay good money for that. At least $50.

[Cynic Sage]

I would pay good money for that. At least $50.

I have a CD with some good beats on it.:em7:

[Babaloo]

"Lazy Agnostic" (aka the King of JPHOCD) seems to think that my "sycophants" (that's you) would like to see me do live debate, as opposed to keeping things in written form. So let's see what kind of feedback we get.

You may only respond if you are a "sycophant" of mine. I know some of the atheists want this, for their own perverse purposes. :teeth:

I'm a sycophant of you yours, if that means "sick of the self-involved phantasy" that keeps you from venturing forth from tweb (AKA Hobbitville) to slay the dragons of Biblical and historical uncertainties that dwell on scholarly email lists run by professionals in the religious field--lists that you might have to act gentlemanly to join until your professorial readers inevitably all grew increasingly astonished at one such as you confounding their every historical and theological uncertainty or unanswered question with your religious answers and certainties hewn out of the solid stone of your brain, like the young Jesus proving his wisdom in the Temple when he was yet a lad and astonishing his much older hearers. Or didn't you know that such forums and newsgroups of a higher scholarly nature than tweb actually existed? Or perhaps you never contemplated that acting gentlemanly and expressing your interest in such groups might allow you access to some of them. Let me know if you need a list.

Didn't you also know about scholarly religious journals to which you could submit some of your amazingly brilliant scholarly articles, and thus tear to pieces the uncertainties of others, placing certainty once again upon its throne, and sending the infidel-like questions raised by so-called "professors of religion" to flight?

I think it's time for you to consider making an effort to step up to a more professional plane and attempt to interact a bit more with professors and professional journals, instead of waiting for scholars of the world to come to tweb or Tektonics and sycophantically bow to your bragodoccio.

Just a helpful suggestion, since you've addressed me so kindly here at tweb and in our personal correspondence.

Cheers,
Ed

[jpholding]

I'm a sycophant of you yours, if that means "sick of the self-involved phantasy" that keeps you from venturing forth from tweb (AKA Hobbitville) to slay blah blah blah blah

Yeah, Edski, we know -- you're frustrated by being unable to take me on, too. :lmbo: How's your own life here on Middle Earth, since you do participate?

Or didn't you know that such forums and newsgroups of a higher scholarly nature than tweb actually existed?

You mean like Till's Errancy list? :rofl: Of course I know of those lists. I often check them for reference material. But that's not where the people who NEED what I do are, dum dum. :duh:

Didn't you also know about scholarly religious journals to which you could submit some of your amazingly brilliant scholarly articles

Yeah, I use them as SOURCES, Edski. :glare: But that's also another place where the people who need what I do are NOT. Come on. Joe on the Street can't afford subscriptions to that stuff. Who are you trying to fool with this red herring breath of yours?

I think it's time for you to consider making an effort to step up to a more professional plane and attempt to interact a bit more with professors and professional journals,

You mean like Robert Price, who I've already dealt with more than a few times? Crossan? Doughty? Etc.? Been doing that. Where have you been?


Just a helpful suggestion, since you've addressed me so kindly here at tweb and in our personal correspondence.

I knew if you were scratched hard enough, your true colors would emerge. :thumb: Thanks, Edski, and as an aside, think you'll ever stop working that job usually reserved for little old ladies with only a high school education?

Chairs,

JP

[Steve Locks]

Hi JP,

Last time we emailed each other, you mentioned your admiration for (although not total agreement with) Dr. Mark Goodacre. Have you ever been on his list "xtalk2" http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/ (or its precursor "xtalk")? I've a vague memory I've seen it mentioned in one of your private discussions, but I might be wrong, however I couldn’t find “xtalk” on a search on your website.

What's your opinion of joining there? Anyone can view the discussions on that list, so all interested parties can watch, even if they don’t have the recommended background to join. However your reading should easily be enough to fit their criteria.

Anyway, see the description at the URL above. I would have thought this was a far more weighty and interesting forum for yourself than a live debate, although both would be interesting of course.

Regards,

Steve


Steve,

We have a policy against advertising other forums here. It would be better if you PMed your question to jpholding.

[Taran Wanderer]

Maybe that should be your next poll, JP. Should you throw yourself into the lion's den? ISTM that while you are trying to build up doubting Christians, the skeptics are trying to evangelize you. But those two agendas entail being in different places, and you have no interest in being where the skeptics want you.

I'm sure you know that already. I just thought it was interesting. :smile:

[jpholding]

Maybe that should be your next poll, JP. Should you throw yourself into the lion's den? ISTM that while you are trying to build up doubting Christians, the skeptics are trying to evangelize you.

I'd rather be evangelized by the First Church of Chimney Soot Snorters. :eww:

[TuckEverlasting]

I'd rather be evangelized by the First Church of Chimney Soot Snorters. :eww:

Oh, but how about the True List (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=20643), JP? Join up. :mossrose:

As Truck Evangelist, I get commission...

[anewlife]

JP,

Will there ever be a live debate on Paltalk?

BTW thanks for the link... I am enjoying your website.

[jpholding]

JP,

Will there ever be a live debate on Paltalk?

I'm not inclined to do that either -- esp. given the final poll numbers. Wow!

In any event, since I did the poll I have had more ideas for more concrete projects I'd rather do involving media like DVDs and books.

Thanks for the good word. :thumb:

[jimbo]

Mr "Holding,"

If you were to do a live debate and you "debated" the way you do on the Internet, you would be laughed out of the auditorium.

Here are some comments which characterize much of your Internet "debating":

"Darn right I am. Responding, rebutting, lashing, destroying, making them cry and whine and get frustrated. You're victim #2,456, Bilbo...Sure has you running for cover, coward. Sure has you in denial. Sure has you refusing to enter the ring. Stay under your rock, burying beetle, the stench of dead meat becomes you." "JP Holding"

"You have yet to do more than posture, kick, scream, whine, and pass gas, as if you were some worthwhile expert in minerals who could respond to an expert like Shanks who has been examining artifacts since before you pooped in your first diaper. Meanwhile talk to the gem experts, the carver, and the geologist. A road gang that beats the crap out of you." "JP Holding"

"You're nothing but a grease-stained, filthy, runny-nosed burger flipper at a fast food joint who rapes popular news articles for rumors and slander that give you cheap jollies." "JP Holding"

"Suit yourself, but you look funny standing in a pile of doo doo." "JP Holding"

Wouldn't it be hilarious to see a grown adult saying these things in a live, public debate? :lol:

Jimbo

[Lazy Agnostic]

"...at the expense of written debate" is an interesting fudge. To the question "Would you listen to/watch a live debate with JPHolding?", I think the results would be overwhelming in the affirmative.

The relative merits of live vs written is not really the point. Most of his opponents want to get him before a live audience so he can't slither behind his cyber-obfuscation.

Holdinig insists he would "kick butt" in a live debate but I think his history of equivocation indicates he fears otherwise. What's he hiding in there?

[anewlife]

I'm not inclined to do that either -- esp. given the final poll numbers. Wow!

In any event, since I did the poll I have had more ideas for more concrete projects I'd rather do involving media like DVDs and books.

Thanks for the good word. :thumb:

That sounds like a better plan... I have been getting way too many 419 scammers anyway on Paltalk...

:eek:

[Taran Wanderer]

"...at the expense of written debate" is an interesting fudge. To the question "Would you listen to/watch a live debate with JPHolding?", I think the results would be overwhelming in the affirmative.
I would, if it would be entertaining, but that would be my only motivation. Well, sometimes they can give a good summary of the issues. But I don't typically expect live debates to resolve anything. The question is too vague to really be useful. If I thought people would think the live debate resolved the issue, I wouldn't want a live debate.

The relative merits of live vs written is not really the point. Most of his opponents want to get him before a live audience so he can't slither behind his cyber-obfuscation.
Haven't you just described one of the merits of live vs. written from the skeptics' perspective? But anyway, if he's being evasive, how would that change if he were in a live debate?

[jpholding]

Mr "Holding,"

If you were to do a live debate and you "debated" the way you do on the Internet, you would be laughed out of the auditorium.

In other words, I'd so accurately describe your position (as I do in the quotes provided) that you'd be laughed out of the room, little man. :lmbo:

Let's face it, Dimbo -- your idea of "argument" is to find places where your opponents (whether myself, the Bible, or who/whatever) use words your fundamentalist-Victorian "morals" find offensive, list them, and then act like you've conducted a rational "argument". :lmbo: Fer sure. You must have some innate fear of soap because you were always getting your mouth washed out with it.


Wouldn't it be hilarious to see a grown adult saying these things in a live, public debate? :lol:


It sure would be! Especially if it pegs the opponent (as it indeed does) for what they are. :thumb:

Don't you wish you could draw, too? :rofl: You're in for some interesting times at the end of this month....

[jpholding]

"...at the expense of written debate" is an interesting fudge. To the question "Would you listen to/watch a live debate with JPHolding?", I think the results would be overwhelming in the affirmative.

Nothing like skilled rationalizations to assuage yourself after a bitter loss, eh, El Crapo? :rofl:

It's a no-brainer, little one: Time is a limited resource. You do A, you don't do B. We don't live in your imagined Zen universe of endlessly spiralling fortune cookies.

The relative merits of live vs written is not really the point.

Yes, it is. The problem you have, which sticks in your craw like a steel beam, is that you have no argument for the merits of one over the other. And thus, no excuse for your "geographic solution" of not being able to counter my alleged "cyber-obfuscation" which you are an utter failure at dealing with in a written, public, and completely fair venue like this one.

We know the real truth, little one: You have an Ann Coulter up your sleeve, and a deep desire to try to attack me with some sort of pie (well, maybe from you, an eclair) or some other physical component. You can perhaps try it anyway, given your penchant for stalking -- but watch out; I have 20/10 vision and excellent reflexes....if you DO try it, you may end up eating that pie to go with the crow you've had ample servings of already -- Mr. "Oops, I was wrong about what deSilva said". :thumb: