an atheist viewpoint

thoughts from a non-theist

Jason Petersen: Liar for Jesus

I was going to write a long article addressing the torrent of dishonesty in this post from a Creationist simpleton we shall call JP, but I just can’t be bothered to get worked up enough about it. Go read it, then I’ll just answer the biggest lies.

Back? Good.

Lie 1. that I posted an ‘edited’ image of a discussion

The truth: I posted a screen shot of the first few messages from a longer conversation (which can be seen here), the sole purpose of which was to prove that I had not instigated the talk of a debate with JP. Once the full conversation was posted by the other person involved, it did nothing to contradict my initial claim.

Lie 2. that I ‘went out of my way’ to hide the other messages in the conversation

The Truth: I hid nothing, I simply posted the part that was relevant to the point I was trying to make. As you can see from the full conversation there was nothing in the ‘hidden’ part that changed any of the meaning of the section I posted. (EDIT: JP has subsequently claimed that I ‘hid’ part that showed me ‘dodging’ a written debate, but the screen shot at the bottom of this post shows that to also be a lie)

Lie 3. that I am avoiding a written debate because I am scared of JP

The Truth: I have never shown any interest in written debate, and have always preferred to be able to speak to someone live. I find written debates dull and, as I stated before, often see Creationists hiding in the format and avoiding answering questions.

Lie 4. well, not so much a lie, as JP relying on the opinion of Bob Sorensen, a man with a hatred and fear of me that verges on the pathological.

We all know Bob’s opinion of me, we also all know that his opinion isn’t worth the weight of the pixels that present it on our screens. That JP has hooked up with such an outright nutter should be enough to tell you everything you need to know!

Lie 5. that I am ‘wilfully lying’ about the debate that never happened in an attempt to gain ‘e-cred’ (whatever the fuck THAT is!)

The Truth: The only person being dishonest here is JP, who seems to be spinning events harder than Alastair Campbell in an attempt to save face in front of his small gang of followers.

To be honest, the whole of JP’s article reeks of desperation, desperation to turn events into something that they are not. Here’s his last paragraph –

“Alex should probably stop spreading falsehoods and making unfounded assumptions regarding events in which you can’t verify yourself. It might save you from being bitten on the rear again. If I were him, I’d be feeling pretty embarrassed after reading this.”

Jason, I don’t feel remotely embarrassed….well, not for me anyway! I DO feel deeply embarrassed for you after you’ve made such a meal of trying to cover your arse. Disagree? You know my Skype user name, and you know where I am.

Oh, the comments are a shower of shite as well.

Anyway, that’s enough on this blog for this year!

EDIT: Petersen is now trying to spin this further! Unfortunately for him he seems to be forgetting what he’s previously said….compare the top comment, from two hours ago on Facebook, with the highlighted section from his blog post –

petersenbs

Ooops!!

ADDITIONAL EDIT: Jason is NOW claiming that he HAS debated me. So he’s flipflopped back to his original claim, the one he then stated was incorrect. How strange –

Screen Shot 2013-02-05 at 20.51.02

EDIT 2

And another!

morepetersenbs
DOUBLE OOPS!

EDIT 3

Might as well point this absolute honking failure by one of JP’s fans –

anotherfailureTRIPLE OOOOOOPPPPSSSSSSS!!!!! 😀

EDIT: More spin from Petersen today, this time claiming that a back and forth on Eric Hovind’s facebook wall was a ‘debate’. Nice try, JP, but no dice. I’m through with dealing with him, and will be ignoring the insane creationist minnow from now on.

Single Post Navigation

9 thoughts on “Jason Petersen: Liar for Jesus

  1. DNO Blogger Ken on said:

    REplied on their site but I doubt it will be accepted. All other replies defend JP and criticise Alex.

  2. Pingback: Recursive Debunking « Eye on the ICR

  3. ashley haworth-roberts on said:

    Please see here – the posts of the last 48 hours – for a blatant example of Petersen censoring a FACT (regarding ‘Lucy’) and trying to keep one of his biased followers in the dark:
    http://forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3153&start=165

  4. ashley haworth-roberts on said:

    Where did my comment vanish to?

  5. Mat Hunt on said:

    I noted that Petersen replied to a single point of my post, so he could have potentially a large number of posts coming out regarding me…

    I made some comments and stuff, so I don’t know what Petersen will do, I clarified my point and I am assuming that Petersen will continue to twisat and turn.

  6. ashley haworth-roberts on said:

    The latest dishonest censorship against myself from Petersen has been detailed here:
    http://forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3153&start=210

Write what you like, but don't cry if you act like a dick and get banned for it

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: