I apologize for the hiatus in new posts lately, I am engaged in a really amazing series of exchanges at the TalkRational site, which will be the subject of a future post when concluded.
Today I received a comment from Kurt, over on "Harrisburg Affair Pt 2: The Timeline" and I reproduce it here, along with my response, and a further update received directly from Dr. Sungenis.
First, Kurt's comment:
I found a pretty good response to Father Harrisons defense of Robert Sungenis at this site,
I think that they were very respectful and made a lot of good points. And I see that you didn't provide a link to Fathers article. It seems to be off-line. Are you sure he still stands behind it?
Kurt: I find a useful correlation between your post and the kind of "argumentation" advanced in your link.
Insinuation is the order of the day:
"I see that you didn't provide a link to Fathers article. It seems to be off-line."
Now, Kurt, let me ask you. If the article were to be on-line, would this have anything at all to do with whether it were true?
If it were to have been online and then taken off-line, would this have anything at all to do with whether it were false?
Of course not.
The only utility such an observation would have, would be to afford the opportunity to advance an insinuation, designed to implant into the mind of the reader that, maybe, just maybe, the author didn't, or doesn't, or might, or might not, really mean what he said?
The logical fallacy is clear, but then some folks aren't very logical.
You are one of them.
We know this from your next statement:
"Are you sure he still stands behind it?"
Kurt. On what possible basis would you advance such a ridiculous question?
Do you have any evidence that he does not stand behind it?
That's because there isn't any.
But if you don't have evidence, perhaps you can employ insinuation to suggest that perhaps, just maybe, a logical connection exists between internet availability and truth content.
Now let us situate this discussion on the basis of logic, and not insinuation.
Fr. Harrison's words are posted above.
You wish to suggest he no longer stands behind them.
Post your evidence.
I will save you the time.
There isn't any.
That is because, of course, he still stands behind them.
Thank you for providing us yet another insight into the techniques of character assassination which have been developed so elaborately on the Get Sungenis blog.
If you wish to take a shower after reading the Get Sungenis blog, and then return here and post whatever "good points" you insinuate but do not bother to demonstrate exist in its content, I will be happy to examine them.
UPDATE 2/9: I contacted Dr. Sungenis, who told me the essay, which was on his website way back in 2008, was removed as a matter of course, since the issue had been fully aired and, as far as he was concerned, fully addressed.
He has now put it back up, and anyone interested in reading it (highly recommended!) can do so: