Technologically challenged . . . please help!

[PeterPaul]

Way to go, Dave! Hangin' with the big dogs!

They had pets there?

 

[PeterPaul]

From the Jimmy Akin website

As of late I have been accused of spending time with a man named Skripper, a man opposed to Cajuns. I have to admit, I have never heard of the man, yet he seems to have been following me around, according to the police. If you see him, he is under the impression that he is a moderator at Christian Forums. Please contact John Walsh immediately!

 

[ZooMom]

Agent 666 to Dispatch...put out a full APB on suspect Dave 'Big Dog' Skripper. Suspect will likely be found lurking around known locations of respected Catholic apologists. Current MO is wait until apologists appear, then bumrush them, pose briefly while an accomplice snaps a photo, then run off giggling madly. Accomplice is unknown at this time, but it is rumoured that he can be 'bought for a price'. Suspect is considered armed and dangerous, and all units should be wary of hard flung copies of the Catechism.

 

[Skripper]

Why don't you just casually mention to them that we'd love for them to drop in over here sometime?

Actually . . . I've considered that. I did have Dave Armstrong come to another site I (as well as geocajun, Shelb5, Artnalex and Carly) used to frequent, Catholic Online, about a year or so ago, to put a particularly obnoxious non-Catholic in his place, so to speak. It was great! Dave made mince meat out of his arguments and the guy tucked tail and left the forum for like 2-3 months. (Remember that, Michelle, Art and Jason? ). However, since then, and for reasons unrelated to that, Dave has basically sworn off of Internet forums. He grew tired of all the ad hominem attacks against him, he tells me. Jimmy, on the other hand, doesn't care much for Internet forums. We talked about it a little when I saw him in San Diego a while back, and he told me that he rarely even spends time on the Catholic Answers forum . . . and he works there, at Catholic Answers. But he hasn't sworn off of forums, the way Dave has. Perhaps I could persuade him to drop by some time, if enough people wanted him to.



Another friend of mine is also a Catholic apologist/author/radio host, but not quite as well known as Dave and Jimmy. His name is Gary Michuta. He is the author of the book, The Gospel According to James McCarthy, which is a rejoinder to McCarthy's book, The Gospel According to Rome. He also hosts a local Catholic apologetics radio show here on Saturday mornings, publishes a Catholic apologetics magazine called Hands On Apologetics (which yours truly had a feature article in a few years ago ) and formally debated James White last year in New Jersey, at the annual "Great Debate," (http://www.catholic-convert.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=88&calDate=5%7C1%7C2004), on the deuterocanon. I'm pretty sure I could get Gary to stop by, if anyone were interested.

 

[Skripper]

.

From the Jimmy Akin website

As of late I have been accused of spending time with a man named Skripper, a man opposed to Cajuns. I have to admit, I have never heard of the man, yet he seems to have been following me around, according to the police. If you see him, he is under the impression that he is a moderator at Christian Forums. Please contact John Walsh immediately!

Agent 666 to Dispatch...put out a full APB on suspect Dave 'Big Dog' Skripper. Suspect will likely be found lurking around known locations of respected Catholic apologists. Current MO is wait until apologists appear, then bumrush them, pose briefly while an accomplice snaps a photo, then run off giggling madly. Accomplice is unknown at this time, but it is rumoured that he can be 'bought for a price'. Suspect is considered armed and dangerous, and all units should be wary of hard flung copies of the Catechism.

 

[Skripper]

.

From the Jimmy Akin website

As of late I have been accused of spending time with a man named Skripper, a man opposed to Cajuns. I have to admit, I have never heard of the man, yet he seems to have been following me around, according to the police. If you see him, he is under the impression that he is a moderator at Christian Forums. Please contact John Walsh immediately!

Agent 666 to Dispatch...put out a full APB on suspect Dave 'Big Dog' Skripper. Suspect will likely be found lurking around known locations of respected Catholic apologists. Current MO is wait until apologists appear, then bumrush them, pose briefly while an accomplice snaps a photo, then run off giggling madly. Accomplice is unknown at this time, but it is rumoured that he can be 'bought for a price'. Suspect is considered armed and dangerous, and all units should be wary of hard flung copies of the Catechism.

 

[Skripper]

Ooops! . . . double post!

 

[geocajun]

Actually . . . I've considered that. I did have Dave Armstrong come to another site I (as well as geocajun, Shelb5, Artnalex and Carly) used to frequent, Catholic Online, about a year or so ago, to put a particularly obnoxious non-Catholic in his place, so to speak. It was great! Dave made mince meat out of his arguments and the guy tucked tail and left the forum for like 2-3 months. (Remember that, Michelle, Art and Jason? ).

I don't remember that Dave - I was chased out of that forum by ol' Mike bickerstaff not long after I joined it so I do not have too many memories of it.

 

[Skripper]

I don't remember that Dave - I was chased out of that forum by ol' Mike bickerstaff not long after I joined it so I do not have too many memories of it.
[/color]

Oh yeah . . . I forgot. I'm sure Michelle remembers it.

 

[Dark_Lite]

Here's my little one:




1










Hahaha.... :\

 

[artnalex]

I did have Dave Armstrong come to another site I (as well as geocajun, Shelb5, Artnalex and Carly) used to frequent, Catholic Online, about a year or so ago, to put a particularly obnoxious non-Catholic in his place, so to speak. It was great! Dave made mince meat out of his arguments and the guy tucked tail and left the forum for like 2-3 months. (Remember that, Michelle, Art and Jason? ).

Dave,

I don't quite remember with whom he debated, however, I do remember him making a few posts within a short period of time. If I recall correctly, he preferred writing articles and books to posting on Internet forums.

Who did he duke-it-out with? Was it a certain SDA person?

 

[Benedicta00]

Dave,

I don't quite remember with whom he debated, however, I do remember him making a few posts within a short period of time. If I recall correctly, he preferred writing articles and books to posting on Internet forums.

Who did he duke-it-out with? Was it a certain SDA person?

It was George.

 

[Benedicta00]

I don't remember that Dave - I was chased out of that forum by ol' Mike bickerstaff not long after I joined it so I do not have too many memories of it.
[/color]

You remember the guy who tried to us the CCC to support vegetarianism? He quoted the CCC to say the meat eaters commit cruelty to animals.

 

[geocajun]

You remember the guy who tried to us the CCC to support vegetarianism? He quoted the CCC to say the meat eaters commit cruelty to animals.

was I a part of that discussion?

 

[Skripper]

Here's my little one:


1





Hahaha.... :\

LOL! I just got that! At first I thought you had posted a picture and it didn't show up . . .

 

[Skripper]

was I a part of that discussion?

I don't think so. The topic of the discussion was actually papal infallibility, (as usual with George), invincible ignorance, the Council of Constance and Pope Martin V. George was, as he always does, arguing against his biggest hang-up, infallibility, especially papal infallibility. It was primarily me and George, but a few other COLers too, taking part in the discussion/debate.

If you remember George, he's unmarried so does not have to spend time with either wife or children. He is also able to spend unlimited time online at work. So the combination of not having to devote time to family and being able to post endlessly from work meant that he is able to spend hours on end online, both at home and at work. This meant that in order to engage George one had to be able to spend a considerable amount of time online or George would declare "victory," basically by attrition, because he had more time available than anyone else (plus, he is a good debater). He would also argue a point endlessly, ad naseum.

Although myself and others were doing a pretty good job refuting George's arguments, he was basically wearing everyone down. I know I did not have endless amounts of time to debate him, since I don't post at work and have to spend time with the family at home. So I got to thinking . . . this guy needs, desperately, someone who is a full-time apologist. So I gave Dave a call and explained the situation to him. And he came into Catholic Online, entered the thread, and demolished George's arguments over the course of a few days.

 

[geocajun]

I don't think so. The topic of the discussion was actually papal infallibility, (as usual with George), invincible ignorance, the Council of Constance and Pope Martin V. George was, as he always does, arguing against his biggest hang-up, infallibility, especially papal infallibility. It was primarily me and George, but a few other COLers too, taking part in the discussion/debate.

If you remember George, he's unmarried so does not have to spend time with either wife or children. He is also able to spend unlimited time online at work. So the combination of not having to devote time to family and being able to post endlessly from work meant that he is able to spend hours on end online, both at home and at work. This meant that in order to engage George one had to be able to spend a considerable amount of time online or George would declare "victory," basically by attrition, because he had more time available than anyone else (plus, he is a good debater). He would also argue a point endlessly, ad naseum.

Although myself and others were doing a pretty good job refuting George's arguments, he was basically wearing everyone down. I know I did not have endless amounts of time to debate him, since I don't post at work and have to spend time with the family at home. So I got to thinking . . . this guy needs, desperately, someone who is a full-time apologist. So I gave Dave a call and explained the situation to him. And he came into Catholic Online, entered the thread, and demolished George's arguments over the course of a few days.

we should invite him here to OBOB. I think the apologetic skill of the folks here far outweighs COL.

 

[Skripper]

Dave,

I don't quite remember with whom he debated, however, I do remember him making a few posts within a short period of time. If I recall correctly, he preferred writing articles and books to posting on Internet forums.

True, he prefers writing books and articles (which is understandable since that's how he pays his bills, along with donations). However, if you've ever visited Dave's website, in addition to many articles and several books, you'll also find many debates he has engaged in. All of these debates were from online discussions he's had with various anti-Catholics whom he's engaged online, in Internet forums (primarily the anti-Catholic site, CARM), except for a few that he has done through e-mail, (for example his e-mail debate with notoriously anti-Catholic, James White). But the vast majority of debates Dave has been involved in and posted on his website are from Internet discussion boards. And he has endured endless ad hominem attacks on these boards. And that's why he's sworn off of them.

Who did he duke-it-out with? Was it a certain SDA person?

No. As Michelle pointed out, it was our Anglican friend, George.

 

[Skripper]

we should invite him here to OBOB. I think the apologetic skill of the folks here far outweighs COL.

Who? George? Nobody here has that kind of time (except maybe TLF).

 

[Benedicta00]

was I a part of that discussion?

Yes your were, I think you could have even stated the thread even- IIRC it began about the Mc Donald’s fries and then he, IIRC began a thread off of that one or someone else did.

Kell (Kgboo) and myself were arguing with this guy trying to convince us that meat eating was wrong for every reason under the sun, health, morality and he even said to me that eating seafood is immoral, that oysters have nerve endings and can feel pain. You did end the discussion I believe by setting him straight. I can’t remember exactly what you said but you said something to the effect that he was being ridiculous.