Turetinfan has posted a reminder to Guardian that his 90 days will be up soon. As the first DL we will be doing after the cruise and debate will be 10/23, Guardian gets almost an extra week to get all that material together. I’m looking forward to the phone call!
TQuid posted a recent diatribe of Art Sippo here. Classic Sippo…though I wish he’d post this stuff on his blog, which has gone dead for months now. Anyway, compare this rant from Sippo with this sermon (listen/download) from back in July. The contrast is…striking.
Update: Guardian wrote in an indicated that his work has him traveling a lot, and hence, he knows he will not be able to call in on 10/23, but he promises to call in, eventually. For those who don’t recall, Guardian had written this about me back in July:
I don’t know why you all give Ole’ Jimbo White the time of day. I own and have read all of White’s books regarding Catholicism, and think they lack scholarship at best and honesty at worst. In fact, I’ve found so many things misconstrued, not just with his books but with what he says in debates and on his blog, I simply dismiss him. Now, a lot of times he does make honest arguments, but they are laughable at best, usually.
He’s the boy that cried wolf, in my opinion.
When I challenged him, he called in, and asked for ninety days to make a list. Now, I really don’t know why someone would need ninety days to make a list when they make claims like that, but we were happy to oblige. Guardian concluded his note to me with these words, “Regardless, please feel free to make fun of me and do ad hominem argumentation about me until I return home and can call in.” Evidently, Guardian doesn’t seem to know what ad-hominem argumentation is. See, I am not the one making an argument here. He is. He made claim X, and when challenged, has demonstrated that he did not have anything to back up that claim. He asked for time. He’s been given time. Now he needs more time. Fine…but all this does is make the serious minded person think that maybe, just maybe, he was not quite up front and honest in his initial statements? Maybe? Possibly? And when you make the kinds of statements he made, without evidence, isn’t that a form of ad-hominem argumentation? I think so.