Get the entire Tekton site on CD or zipfile. Get a stripped-down copy of this page.

I spy, with my eagle eye -- a Skeptic buying time!

We've had some hints lately that "Skeptic X" is looking for ways to accomplish two goals:

1. Keep his 150 fans happy and content.
2. Avoid addressing material here that points out some of his most embarrassing errors (i.e., thinking we wanted him to pay for 90% of this website; being ignorant of guilt in the ancient world, etc.)

Lately Skeptic X has done this by issuing a debate challenge he already knows I said NO to months ago, and we have some indication that there's another distraction in the works. It's still possible we'll shame the old bean into facing up to this stuff, but in the meantime, Skeptic X has found a perfect way to buy himself time, and it's the same well he always dips to: Distraction to a side issue. And what side issue is more popular with gullible Skeptics than, "Hey, that guy is asking for money"? No, Skeptic X's latest isn't an article about any Biblical issue; instead he wants to address (since it doesn't require looking up anything in that Viking Desk Reference, much less in books like Malina and Rohrbaugh's Social Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels) the item here where I told Skeptics who complain about this ministry soliciting funds to shove off and get a life. As noted there, Danny Boy Barker of the Freedom from Lice Foundation grabs in a whopping 500K a year from the Skeptical suckers, so if Skeppies want to complain about solicitation, I have Danny's name and address for them, so they can complain about him before they complain about my measly solicitation for a mere 24K. Skeptic X of course knows like any Skeptic who can put his pants on in the morning that playing the "money grub" card is a great one that always makes the thralls happy, so he can satisfy 1 and 2 above easily by taking this one on. Funny thing though, he never actually will explain why Danny is allowed to grub 500K and not be tagged as a sucker puncher, while my paltry 24K isn't short of a capital offense -- other than by drawing comparisons that aren't even germane to the issue.

At any rate, let's have a look at this, and since it has been fun we'll do the same thing we've done for a few other items lately and insert comments in green. Skeptic X's comments are in normal print. Material from my old barkbucks item is in italics. We also now have a section below about a smaller and more similar skeptical "ministry" that's doing the same as we are, and more. Let's see Skeptic X explain away THAT one with misguided comparisons.

[J.P.] [Holding], who seems to take great delight in seeing how many personal insults he can hurl at skeptics in a single website article Which is to say, how many of Skeptic X's feathers (and those of other Skeptics who take themselves too seriously) I can ruffle...oops, by his own logic following, Skeptic X's feathers are not only ruffled, but also fell off, blew away, and left him stark nekkid..., has apparently ruffled his feathers over the comments that skeptics have made As usual Skeptic X thinks Skeptics are thorns in my side, when they are actually flies in my soup. about the flagrant emphasis Flagrant! Yes. About as flagrant as, um, "Support the Secular Web!" is at infidels.org....maybe that's only visible to Christians. that he puts on soliciting money for his personal "ministry" on the front page of his Tektonics website. He's right. I should put it in a corner. Like the uh, Secular Web does...their front-page corner. And like this other skeptical "ministry" does (below)... His dander has been so riled "There are so many flies in his soup" that he has posted an article on the subject "that he has decided to entertain himself" to try to justify "by making the flies do the backstroke." the daily pitches Oh, sorry! Didn't know the Sec Web's appeal disappeared every other day or that Barker only solicited on Tuesdays. I guess to make Skeptic X happy I need to add and remove it on alternate days. Or every third day. Or -- say, how often is one actually allowed to do this and not be accused of racketeering? that he makes for money that will be used almost entirely for his own personal benefit. Yep, and Danny Boy doesn't draw a personal salary, nossir. Give it time. I may use the funds to publish materials, for example. Just like Danny Boy. As my reply to the article will show, he actually had the gall to compare what he is doing to the activities of the Freedom From Religion Foundation in Madison, Wisconsin. "Gall" meaning what itched his bladder. Practically speaking the only difference between Tekton and FFRF is ideology. We do the same sort of activities: write and publish articles; act as advocates. Barker has had more time of course and is at a later stage, with more kinds of activities, but the only real difference is ideology, and so Skeptic X is saying here that it is "gall" to make the comparison because his ideology is allowed to soak the suckers, while mine is not.

I have a word for certain Skeptics out there who want to make a fuss over this ministry soliciting financial support.

Get a life!

Most of us who have commented on [Holding]'s money-grubbing activities already have lives, I.e., spending hours a day writing articles complaining about money-grubbing by the ideological opposition in order to ignore more salient issues. But this is more likely an example of Skeptic X's pathological literalism. "Get a life" is of course a proverbial expression meaning that the subject is wasting time and needs to occupy their time otherwise. Not surprisingly, Skeptic X as a pathological literalist thinks I literally mean he spends his "life" doing this. which I'm sure none would trade for his, Nah, they like being miserable. You can tell by that forced smile in Skeptic X's photo. Looks like he sat on a porcupine while constipated but was told to smile anyway. which he is devoting to the lost cause Skeptic X shouts up from under the foot on the elephant of trying to prove that an ancient collection of books written in prescientific, highly superstitious times is "the word of God." "Versus the sort of bigoted and enlightened attitude I offer! Snort!" By constantly hurling insults, sarcasms, and vituperations at nonbelievers, he goes about it in a way that guarantees failure if he has any hopes at all of ever convincing anyone, who isn't already so inclined to believe, that the Bible is the "inspired word of God." Who said I was out to convince constipated owls like Skeptic X? Again, these are people who think a valid answer to the question, "What are the hallmarks of a collectivist society?" is, "Small furry rodents." They use Paine and Ingersoll as valid sources, whine endlessly about hypocrisy in the church while having lied to make their own way out of it (like Barker and even Skeptic X himself, as I have recently learned), and commit the sort of blatant inconsistencies we see here. I have as much a goal of convincing a member of this crowd as Skeptic X has a goal of playing for the Lakers. He needs to take his own advice and get a life, because what he has now can't be much of a life, As opposed to say teaching college English for 30 years and spending exciting nights conjugating verbs unless his goals are to succeed at sponging off society Like Dan Barker, and the guy below in his hopes, does? No, that's right, because of their ideology, Skeptics never sponge. and damaging the very cause that he is committed to. Not according to 99.9% of the letters I get, sorry. Maybe Skeptic X has secret government statistics he can share with us showing the "damage" being done.

Ever since Jim Bakker and Oral Roberts made a strain with their machinations, it seems the Skeptics have always felt it some kind of "answer" to point out when a ministry asks people for financial support. That and quoting their mission statement. It's enough to refute the entire site, so don't bother any further.

Jim Bakker and Oral Roberts? Good , he's heard of them. Does [Holding] really believe that these are the only charlatans who have been guilty of fleecing the sheep? No, and I didn't say they were, so this is Skeptic X's usual game of putting words in an opponent's mouth for rhetorical effect so he can say goofy stuff like, "If so, what planet has he been living on?" I chose Bakker and Roberts as names that were most likely to be recognized by a majority of readers. I'm sure Skeptic X could name some more from back when he was my age, and I could throw in a lot of others like Benny Hinn, Peter Popoff, and a few others. But when it comes to name recognition, Bakker and Roberts got the most media attention and as far as I can see would be the most likely names to be remembered in this context. They were certainly the main names that came up when the Skeptics I encountered complained about the subject of money-grubbing. Other than that, Skeptic X obviously has no real complaint, so he had to make one up.

Well, before you Skeppies get too in the mood, I have something for you. You see, my local library offers me access to a special database called Associations Unlimited. It's a neat tool -- here is a description: "Contains information for approximately 460,000 international and U.S. national, regional, state, and local nonprofit membership organizations in all fields, including IRS data on U.S. 501(c) nonprofit organizations."

Does it also include Tektonics Apolgetic Ministries, Inc.? Last I checked it did not, but because Tekton doesn't receive enough to have to file an annual return yet (that limit is 25K) it may not be in there for some time yet. I have also not found other smaller non-profits listed, but of course Barker's was.

[Holding] didn't have to go to Associations Unlimited to get information on the Freedom from Religion Foundation. Plenty of information about it is available on the internet. Um, sure. The same information I found below? Oh, I am sure Danny or someone would have given up the data if asked, but I like using online sources and this one is readily available. So meanwhile again, what the bleck is Skeptic X wasting time for making a point of this? Who gives a carp how I went about getting the info? By resource expenditure I think I spent a lot less time (perhaps 5 seconds) using AU than I would have calling FFRF or searching their website for info that may or may not have been there. By the way, it is not Dan Barker's Freedom from Religion Foundation. Yes, actually, it is. He's in charge of it. It's his. It was founded a decade before Barker became affiliated with it. Anne Nicol Gaylor and her daughter Annie Laurel Gaylor founded it in 1976, while Annie Laurel was still a college student, long before either one of them even knew Barker, who at that time was working as a missionary in Mexico. They incorporated the organization in 1978. And now, Dan is in charge. It's his organization. That obviously does not exclude others, but he is the figurehead, the top dog, the man who speaks his mind on its behalf. It is HIS organization. And Skeptic X using this sort of pathological carping to score points when he can't get out of embarrassing errors like, "What! You want me to pay for 90% of your website??" Skeptic X wastes some time giving a bio of Barker that we will skip.

I wonder how many national talk shows [Holding] has appeared on. Tekton was mentioned on Hank Hanegraaff's national show. We'll see how many I get personally "on" when I have fleeced as many suckers for as many years as Barker has. Not that I'm really trying. Skeptic X wastes more time comparing how many public debates, lectures, etc. Barker has done, but let's nip that analogical impairment in the bud, shall we? At the same "growth stage" that FFRF was in -- pre-Barker, presumably -- that Tekton is now, which is about 1 1/4 years into full time existence, to ask Skeptic X's own questions: How many public debates has [Holding] or FFRF, at the same stage conducted? How many lecture tours does he or FFRF at the same stage make each year? How many radio programs does he appear on? I have been on four, actually. How many was FFRF on at the same stage? Does he do anything at all except sit at home and write articles for a website Ah! Now let me ask: How many articles had FFRF written at the same stage of the game? that solicits money so that he can keep pecking away at his keyboard? As opposed to, "yapping away before a TV, radio, or live audience?" Here's the game as it is, folks. Skeptic X winds up:

Is [Holding] serious in trying to compare his activities to those of Dan Barker? Ah, I see. So in order to be "eligible" to solicit funds in Skeptic X's view, you have to be appearing on TV, radio, and before live audiences. I gotcha. Did anyone see the "logic" in that connection? I sure missed it. Or maybe he's saying, "You have to be as big as FFRF to solicit funds." Oh. How did FFRF survive in its first few years as a 501 (c)(3) then? Did they rob banks? Play the market? I can't really say, because it's not really clear what Skeptic X thinks is the difference here. I never compared Tekton to FFRF in terms of scale (which given the age difference, isn't much use anyway) or activities. I compared it in terms of one thing: We both ask for bucks to keep the ship running. And if FFRF can do it and pass Skeptical muster, why can't I? The real reason is coming up:

Uptight about my solicitation, and my asking people to contribute $70-80 per year?

I'm not, I just consider it another example of a would-be champion of the faith fleecing the gullible. Ah, so that's it. So all I have to do is say that Barker is a "would be champion" of "unfaith" who is "fleecing the gullible". See how easy it is? What it runs down to is that Skeptic X thinks I should not solicit help because he disagrees with me. Let's get it straight, folks: I disagree with Barker out the kazoo, but I don't care if he asks people for money to promote his ideology. It's a fair thing to do. Most people would like to stump for their own ideology, but they haven't the time or the resources. Organizations like mine, like Barker's, heck, even like PETA, fill this need. My request here has been that Skeptics be consistent, but that's obviously not going to happen. Like Skeptic X, they feel they can call you a crook because they think they're right. Thus: Anyone who could read [Holding]'s website, and especially the trouncings he has taken in his attempts to "debate," So says the man under the elephant's foot, squeaking, "There was guilt in these passages!" and then would pledge to him $70 to $80 per year deserves to be fleeced. Yeah, you bunch of suckers. Skeptic X is way smarter than you. I put them in the same class with the gullible who fall for the Nigeria-oil and other get-rich schemes that permeate the internet. Skeptic X has no choice. Unfortunately, if he values free speech then the comparison to Nigerian oil is a truckload of bigoted nonsense. Even if Skeptic X does think we are wrong, who the blazes is he to deny anyone the freedom to serve and promote a point of view? Bottom line: Skeptic X's only criteria for asking for money is, "You have to agree with my ideology." I'll skip past where I listed FFRF's staff and 500K funding, and past the list of FFRF books, to:

Maybe [Holding] could arrange for Amazon to market FFRF's books so that he could list them on his website and get a cut on any sales made through him. A cut that amounts to $400 per year right now. Big money. He has a long list of books that he disapproves of, so he could add these seven, knock them in reviews, and then wait for the money to come in. Darned if you do, darned if you don't. If I didn't offer sales links on those I'd be accused by Skeptics of being scared to give them. Hey, he's not proud. Money is money. The Secular Web agrees. They have Amazon sales links to Christian apologetics works. Skeptic X should check his cohorts for consistency before he mouths off. But let me add that I do have no objection to people buying adversarial works. They will not learn to be competent otherwise.

Despite [Holding]'s sarcasm, there is a huge difference in FFRF's book marketing and his. [Holding] lists books that he doesn't approve of, pans, them in sarcastic reviews, and then says, "But you can get it here [at Tektonics]." As noted, if I didn't, I'd be accused -- as I have in the past -- of "covering up" the books or hiding them. Darned if ya do. Darned if ya don't. Would make a nice add-on to my "You may be a fundy atheist if..." list. FFRF markets books compatible with its mission; it doesn't hawk books that it disapproves of in order to get a cut on the sales. No, the Sec Web does that. It's called integrity, something that is foreign to [Holding]'s personal moral code. The Sec Web will be glad to hear that. I'll make a deal with Skeptic X which he'll ignore. I will remove all sales links to books I give 2 downs or 3 downs to, provided when I get the inevitable "why are you not linking for purchase" letters, he will take my forward of the message and draft a response telling the complainer how they should admire my integrity, and address whatever other points are needed. Do we have a deal? I haven't heard from him yet.

Anyway, the information that [Holding] has posted about the Freedom from Religion Foundation shows an organization with a staff and a long list of activities that it engages in. Does [Holding] think that the lawsuits that FFRF files on behalf of groups seeking equity in the courts on religious intrusions into affairs of state are done pro bono publico? Nope. Like I said, I don't begrudge FFRF one bit. Does [Holding] have any idea what legal fees would be in all of the cases that FFRF is involved in each year? I can guess. Meanwhile, prior to all those lawsuits and such, and in their first year of full time operation comparable to mine, how did FFRF staff pay themselves?

Has [Holding] ever accessed The Freedom From Religion Foundation and seen the picture of Freethought Hall, which is located in Madison, Wisconsin, and serves as the center of all of FFRF's activities? Does [Holding] think that a building like this was bought for just peanuts? As many peanuts as Schuller's Crystal Cathedral, right? Sure didn't go to pay for food, clothing and shelter for Mr. Barker. Tekton operates out of a home and always will. I don't need no stinking building like glory-hog Barker does. See how easy it is? Meanwhile, the only reason Skeptic X can give for saying "Build, Barky, Build" while saying (say) Campus Crusade can't is, "I disagree with them!"

So in short, Skeptics: Let's not hear anything about this ministry asking for funds -- not until Dan cuts that budget and starts wearing sackcloth. Let's not hear any complaints about being supported through Amazon profits. Let's cut the tactic of quoting mission statements, or solicitation statements, as a form of "refutation".

I have seen the fallacy of false analogy many times in my debates with biblical inerrantists, but this article has to be one of the most flagrant cases of comparing apples to oranges that I have ever seen. Wait for the word from the analogically impaired: [Holding] is trying to compare his little enterprise operated out of his home to a national organization, which conducts debates across the nation, publishes a newspaper, files lawsuits all over the country on behalf of the separation of church and state, and sends representatives to national talk shows. So once again: You can't ask for money until you get big and do more stuff. FFRF before it became big paid staff with literal peanuts. That sure was a burst of logic from Baloney Central. Skepticism, Inc., is a nonprofit 501 (c) (3) organization, which I established 12 years ago and have operated out of my home ever since. It has a staff of one--me. At no time have I ever solicited contributions. Skeptic X never was competent enough to grow more than that. But let's say he wanted to become full time like Danny. Did he have to get the building, get on all the TV shows, etc, first? Not by the ways of the Skeptical "ministry" we'll look at below. People have voluntarily sent contributions, but I never once asked for donations. When money was needed to keep the organization going, I contributed it out of my salary as a college instructor and then later out of my retirement pension, Which is what I did when Tekton was still a part-time pursuit. Skeptic X could obviously not have done the same for SI unless he had a body double or never slept. So if [Holding] wants to compare his one-man Tektonics Apologetics Ministry to another nonprofit organization, Skepticism, Inc., would be one more parallel to his. Since Skeptic X never did SI 40 hours a week -- not until maybe he retired and lived off pension, Social Security, or whatever -- there is no parallel at all. Meanwhile Skeptic X is the one with apples in his ears and oranges in his nostrils. We'll draw a parallel to a Skeptical effort more like our own in terms of scale below.

I never begged for money, [Holding], so should I be entitled to criticize your little "ministry" for trying to fleece the gullible out of enough money to let you stay at home and crank out your daily quota of cut-and-pasted "apologetics"? Not unless he's a roaring hypocrite, which he is. Once again the bottom line is: Skeptic X says we can't solicit support, 1) because we are wrong and he disagrees with us; 2) When in doubt, see #1; and....

Disparity in size is not the only factor that makes [Holding]'s comparison of his "ministry" to FFRF a flagrant case of false analogy. 3)Because we are smaller -- I suppose, again, FFRF emerged fully grown from Gaylor's forehead The Freedom From Religion Foundation is one of just a few organizations that work to keep religion from intruding into state affairs. "I agree with them, therefore THEY are allowed to solicit funds!" On the other hand, the internet is polluted with websites maintained by would-be apologists But not "polluted with" Skeptical websites, which are in the right, hence deserving to exist. like [J.P.] [Holding]. He could vanish into oblivion and would never be missed, Um yeah. Tell that to the 50K a month who check in...while Skeptic X has what? 150 fans? but if FFRF, Inc., dissolved, a huge hole would be left that those interested in keeping religion out of public affairs would have to fill. Yep. All 2000 who showed up for the "Godless Americans" march. That's a big fat hole all right. It still amounts to, "They're right and you're wrong, therefore shut up." Nothing like the principles of free speech to get your blood up in the morning.

Apples and oranges--no doubt about it. This is just another example of [Holding]'s complete inability to reason logically. Yep, Skeptic X robbed the fruit stand yet again. So it boils down to this: Whether you can ask for money depends on 1) whether Skeptic X agrees with you; 2) how big you are; 3) what forums you get into. Gotcha.

And above all, let's see you take on actual arguments instead. Do we make ourselves clear?

Well, I have done that, [Holding]. I have taken your "arguments" and gone through them point by point, Ah, there's that delusion of competence again. I don't mind, he needs it to keep the thralls in line. while you write "replies" that hop, skip, and jump over major points that I made. Often stated. As yet unproven. Anyone can go to The Skeptical Review Online and see that you are getting from me detailed rebuttals Which involve repeating the same things 99,287,283 times and avoiding embarrassing errors like, "Why don't you pay for 90% of this website?" and "These guys really did have guilt just like us" and "You need serfs to have a feudal system!" (which I am still in the process of writing) "even as I write this sort of distractive junk to buy time, just like I bought 6 months to reply to Everette Hatcher" and that you are ignoring most of them and trying to hide your evasions behind a constant stream of sarcasm and insults. Dream on, Skeptic X. A little imagination is good for the soul. Furthermore, you have proven yourself to be a liar by not linking your "replies" to my articles as you promised you would do before the debates began. Ah. A hint at the next evasive project. I'll just keep this...under my hat for now. I'll love to see Skeptic X put his foot in his mouth. Again.

And now an update. Thanks to a reader I have found something to make Skeptic X's head spin a little faster -- a Skeptical "ministry" that is begging for bucks as much as I am -- even more! -- using the same techniques -- even more! -- and is actually not quite yet full time, but getting there. I am talking about The Infidel Guy -- host of a "freethought radio" program that from the looks of it is purely Internet-broadcasted, but I could be wrong. That would be a main difference that makes no difference: The Guy is into broadcast, whereas I'm into writing. The Infidel Guy isn't much for detailed and rational argument; he's mostly into sound bites, so he's not the sort we'd write much about here. But have a look at the page and check out all the shameless promotion and begging (note 6/4/03: a lot of this has changed since I wrote this article):

• Start on the left side with that there advertisement. Oh, my, can you imagine what a fit Skeptic X would pitch if I had a paid ad for (say) Zondervan Books? As a 501(c)(3) I am not sure I can accept ads (though since I wouldn't anyway, I won't bother to find out -- as an aside, I don't see that Infidel Guy has a 501(c)(3) established, though he might) but either way, it's a technique to get dollars.
• Now go to the middle. It says, "176 subscribers needed to go fulltime." What's this!? Hmm, sounds like my "We need x number of people donating x dollars to keep this ministry full time." I have dropped that number-count for now while I reassess the financing situation, but it's the same magilla, only Infidel Guy is about 120 people behind me. As an aside, a subscriber needs to pay at least $60 to Infidel Guy. And I just might steal that idea myself. (I'm not clear on whether this is for the Guy to work full time on his site himself, or just have a full time broadcast; but I don't care and it doesn't matter.)
• Can you imagine how Skeptic X would whine if I started offering Tekton mugs, T-shirts, etc.? Look no further than Infidel Guy for offers like these:

  NEW Donate $8.00 to enter to win a years subscription, a Stamper, an Atheist Network button, and an Evolvefish car emblem (a $66.00 value) Winner will be chosen 02/10/03. Last month's winner was Peter G.

  Okay I keep getting requests for the AN button worn at the March. Click image to enlarge. Order below. Box of: 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 100

  IN US WE TRUST (stamp) Order yours right now for only $15.00 (inkpad included) Be sure to let me know whether you want red or black ink.

  10 buttons cost $10. I am not sure what kind of profit (if any) the Guy makes from this, but it's there. Now look on the right side:

  Your link here only $10 for 7 days.

  Egad! Can you imagine Skeptic X whining if I charged Glenn Miller for linking to his site? I do this for free in the What's New section.

  Donate what you can. Think of IG when you get your Tax refund too. Select any amount. $5? $10,000?

  The 10K figure is followed by a smiley icon, but just try to imagine Skeptic X's reaction if I did the same. This is on the Guy's front page, folks. Skeptic X would erupt to make Vesuvius look like a burp.

  Keep us on the air by giving $5.00 directly to the company that provides our streaming services.

  Fair enough. How would Skeptic X like me saying, "Keep us online by giving $5 directly to our host server?" Hello, Skeptic X?

  Do you think the shows are worth more than I'm offering? Select a monthly subscription amount below. 8, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50 /month

  Yeesh! That's as much as $600 per year. Well, if the Guy can do it, why can't we? Note well: That's four appeals for support in just one column and eight different ways to send Infidel Guy money on his front page alone! I have just two -- direct support, and Amazon.

  In closing, let me make it clear that we do not begrudge Skeptics doing this at all. Rather, I still want to know why it is that someone like Barker or Infidel Guy can do this and get carte blanche, while we get the shaft from complainers like Skeptic X. "He's bigger" isn't a valid reason -- and isn't for the Guy, as he's the same relative size or smaller. "He does different stuff" is no valid reason. Maybe when Skeptic X gets the apples and oranges out of his ears, we'll get an actual answer.

  But don't count on it.

  ---

  Go Home!