This is probably going to be a long entry requiring various updates I have divided this into four sections. I’ll add to them as time permits and if required by any commentary.
It refers to a debate between myself and Jay Dyer prompted originally by his zombie-like followers harassing me for months that I should listen to, debate, etc this guy. When I eventually, after a few months of this decided to go look at who or what this guy was it was clear within five minutes that he was deceitful and also exhibited some autistic traits (in the worst possible sense), and those of you horrified at me beating on a poor autist, remember I have Aspergers’ myself, so, relax.
UPDATE: On that very note, ironically, I have noticed a fault of mine I must admit to. It’s not that I wasn’t aware I had this issue, I did, but the hundreds of comments both on my channel, at Vox’s blog, emails etc I got regarding this debate, there was a thin, yet noticeable pattern that in all fairness I have to admit I am almost certainly guilty of, and that would be a lack of patience and to a certain extent of charity too.
I would like to be precise, since this problem is ultimately one of precision and while from my perspective the issue is simply one of almost everyone else being mostly too stupid to follow things that seem obvious to me, it is also true that that IQ gap issue is a real thing and ultimately, given I am generally the one with the higher IQ, it is absolutely incumbent upon me to bridge the gap (insofar as it can be bridged, which honestly, sometimes I think is just not possible). So I have made an attempt at correcting below, in green so that there is no revisionism and my faults are exposed properly, what could possibly be misunderstandings rather than out and out deception on the part of Jay Dyer. I did make an attempt at this in the debate itself, when I said that perhaps we were talking past each other and I tried to understand if he perhaps meant something different than what I was perceiving, but Jay of course was busy repeating himself, and not really listening to anything so that didn’t work either, anyway, the rest below remains unaltered and my general reasoned and instinctive opinion, however, you could look at any green text as an alternative view I theoretically could have or maybe should have come up with instead if I was giving the befit of the doubt at every turn.
It’s not something I tend to do because of my general life experience, but I can see that in some instances, and genuine argument/debate is one place, where in proper etiquette, it should probably almost always be extended, so if nothing else I have possibly learnt that, even if, in practice it’s a lost art and I don’t think there are but a handful of people capable of doing it. That said, there is objectively no reason why I could fault the green version of events on deeper reflection, so it’s at least possible.
The debate is here
UPDATE: Apparently the full debate has been deleted for whatever reason. There is however a 3 minute mostly recap of the internet bunfight main points.
SPOILER: It’s well made because I am sure it will let the idiots who follow Jay continue to believe they are right, despite the fact that Jay absolutely wrecks himself with the correct answer to the question: How do you interpret Catholic Dogma Jay? The answer, of course, is CANON LAW, which is precisely the point, the entire volume of Denzinger, or the works of Ott, or Thomas Aquinas for that matter, are irrelevant, because HOW you interpret it, is by using Canon Law.
Jay Dyer’s original Video I was critiquing is here
and of course, my channel is here
with a post-analysis for video (not as exhaustive as this post but for those of you who find reading painful) is here
***
PART I – Answering the spergs – This is simply a list of the false accusations made against me by both Dyer and his colony of gamma zombies with responses to the individual items. Some agglomerated for ease of reply, some with examples to show the level of IQ the morons making them have.
PART I A – The Denzinger Debacle – As this was a main point of contention and one his spergy followers couldn’t grasp I devoted a whole little section to it.
PART II – The actual issues – This will be rather lengthy and grow over time as I add details, this first draft is taken from the general notes I had taken and adjusted slightly to try and deal with the points made, it also tries to follow the original format of the debate in terms of Chronology but not necessarily.
PART III – Conclusions – My take on it all
***
