Positive Feedback From Ideological Opponents

• Bob Norsworthy is a Christian apologist who tries vainly to answer some of my arguments but says (2003-06) "you have a great website".
• Derek Pierson is a tektonics.org contributor who initially had viciously negative feedback but later (2003-05) had a change of heart: "When I first read your replies to me, they struck me as being condescending towards me, but having read the e-mails over again, and observing some of your exchanges with other people, I'm pretty well convinced that you're mainly interested in comparing arguments, and not going out of your way to intimidate or denigrate anyone. [..] I've also decided to submit a payment for your book.  I've gotten enough out of it to where I think it's warranted."
• Timothy Wilken (of synearth.net) disagrees with my ecological optimism but said (2003-02) he "found that your [futurology] article made interesting reading, and the scope of your thinking is to be much admired".
• ASA Jones (of ex-atheist.com) wrote (2003-01): "I must say, I am astounded at the quality of debate that you put forth. I did say that I would never link to atheist sites, and I will continue to maintain that policy, however, I would like your permission to publish our current conversation to my site." She later changed her mind.
• Danielle, a fellow libertarian who disagrees with my criticism of Israel, writes (2002-05) "Your Web Site is fabulous!!!"

Other Positive Feedback

• Linked here (2003-06) under "Big Thinkers/Big Thoughts".
• Eric wrote (2003-06) "I came across your website and I was greatly impressed by the vast compilation of knowledge."
• Kurt wrote (2003-05) "I have to say... I am not easily impressed... but I'm impressed! I regularly find interesting pages online... only to find, ultimately... that something inevitably reeks of crackpotism, and therefore invalidates the integral totality of the worldview expressed. You are definitely exempt from that assessment... although I should perhaps read everything more carefully the second time. :-)  Sharp thinker, you! Congruence with your worldview: +>99%"
• Thomas wrote (2003-05) "Your website on human knowledge is wonderful and daunting. I plan to return to it many times. For now I stand in awe, but only of the content, not the web design.[..]"
• Lesley wrote (2003-05) "I am a Belgian student in my last year of secondary school (Latin-mathematics programme). I am currently reading your text on human knowledge and find it most interesting. [..] Thank you for making this amazingly interesting document available for everyone."
• http://www.wunderland.com/WTS/Tirade/TiradesLinks.html (2003-04): "Cool sites of 2003"
• Jeff Hirsch blogged (2003-04): "one man is trying to at least define what the limits of our knowledge are. That is to say "what do we know?" And more importantly, "what DON'T we know?" Software engineer Brian Holtz has taken a crack at not only systematically organizing the systems and boundaries of our knowledge, but he has also gone on to defend which systems of knowledge or thinking are the most useful. [..] I've never organized the big ideas like this guy has. It's really helpful in the whole "figuring it all out" project that has been on my mind since sometime late in college when I first began to wonder about the universe and my place in it. Download a copy and expand your consciousness in real and tangible ways."
• FirstScience.com is "a leading Internet Science site" that describes (2003-03) HK:F&L thus: "Life, the Universe, and Everything...as conveniently summarised for you by a chap called Brian Holtz. Thanks Brian."
• Edimilson writes (2003-01) from Brazil: "Your book and the Skeptic's Dictionary radically changed my life and the way I think. Will your book have someday translated versions to foreign languages? I would like to buy it in my own language (portuguese) to give to friends who do not know English."
• The San Diego Union-Tribune (21st in US circulation at 350K) extensively quoted some of my futurology predictions in a 2003-01-01 article: "In his book, 'Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits,' Brian Holtz isn't afraid to ask the Big Questions, such as why is there something rather than nothing. Nor is he afraid to use really big words."
• Kent Van Cleave writes (2002-12): "I was doing a search on 'axiology evolution' and found your stuff, which impressed me immensely. I hope this impresses you at least a bit, because I'm a doctoral student in the philosophy of science, with an M.A. in philosophy already under my belt."
• Adrian writes (2002-11) "Thank you for your text - I am finding it immensely interesting and informative. I am a student at Oxford University, England and have sent copies and links to the text to several of my friends in accordance with the 'Memeware' stipulation. It's even making me seriously consider a degree course in Physics."
• JR Mooneyham writes (2002-06) "I must say it is an impressive work, almost staggering in its ambitions and real accomplishment. Especially if the rest of your life and work is taken into account, from examining your bio (i.e.: how could you possibly find the time and energy to create this densely packed behemoth?)."
• Randau writes (2002-02) "I've visited your http://humanknowledge.net web site and was a bit taken back by the extensiveness of its scope.  It sounds as though it contains all the knowledge of the world obtained since the beginning of civilization, i.e., and encyclopedia of human knowledge.  Is this the result of some kind of organization or collaboration or did you do it yourself?"
• Paul Filseth writes (2001-07) "Terrific book.  I'm bowled over by the sheer ambition of it.  What are you doing in this century?  You belong in the Enlightenment."  Paul later accused me of incivility.

Negative Feedback From Ideological Opponents

• Derek Pierson is a tektonics.org contributor who ended up (2003-03) retracting his original (2002-09) insults:
• Given how ultra-sensitive you are to anything typed your way, and given how egotistical you (most likely) are [..]
• Learn some patience old man. [..]
• Now that I have slapped you around again, [..]
• I guess I just assumed that if you were able to secure a publisher, you would. The fact that you haven’t leads me to believe no one envisions [your text] worthy of print.
• I don't need to waste my time looking at [your text] anymore [..]
• You’re probably just afraid to admit that almost no one (and I’m being intentionally generous) has gotten anything out of your book – or sent you any amount of money.
• [A]fter I pasted that asinine proposal of yours to some of my friends – all of whom are non-believers – they absolutely laughed at it.Yes.  They think you’re a joke, Brian.  Even non-believers.  How’s that ego now big shot?
• I stand by any insults I've directed your way [..]
• Robert Turkel is the creator (under the pseudonym J.P. Holding) of the Christian apologetics site tektonics.org, whose childish insults to me in our discussions (*, *, *) are too numerous to repeat here. A sample from his latest effort will suffice:
• Check out his pic on his site, where he looks like he's sitting on a very large porcupine [..]
• I admit I left out the time he burped.
• I recommend Daffy minimize his own embarrassment by using a good topical cream.
• Beating on Daffy is like eating popcorn. Pass the salt and artificial, butter-flavored grease that used to be his integrity and self-esteem, please.
• These replies will also still be up long after Daffy has taken his meds.
• [Holtz's] main purpose is to verify his own beliefs, prop up his own ego, and bother people. He got frustrated when he was forced to take his own medication, something I happen to be good at making people do.
• [..] it's the only fun he gets these days, once he's through kicking the dog, watching paint dry, and stealing old ladies' canes.
• [..] bark by bark, burp by burp, scratch and sniff by scratch and sniff, [..]
• I too might be an egomaniacal ignoramus with misplaced self-confidence.
• ASA Jones (at ex-atheist.com) was originally complimentary, but changed her mind about posting our conversation on her site and ran away saying "you still may be willing to waste your time with one whom you consider to be an inferior thinker, however, I am not."
• Gary Amirault (at evangelical site tentmaker.org) sent me an initial email saying "prepare yourself for the Truth", but was so unprepared for our subsequent discussion that he soon was saying things like:
• You're full of yourself and nothing else.
• You just plain old wreak of pride, dude.
• Oh, Lord, sic em! Get this dude.
• Brian, you should dry up, really!
• Now only are you utterly proud, but you appear not to have a sense of humor either.You must have had an awful childhood.
• Come on, Brian, please. I'm beginning to think you're not serious, that your website and emails are all a big joke.
Later he got upset that I dared post my responses that quoted his reckless remarks: "[you] snip out just enough words from someone to misrepresent what they say [..]  How dishonest. And you say you speak truth. What a lie." He says I remind him of himself 19 years ago: "arrogant, vain, conceited and quite stupid".

Negative Feedback From Ideological Allies

• Paul Filseth is a fellow libertarian atheist who was originally complimentary, but I incurred his wrath by questioning an analogy he used and citing the philosophical literature on a definitional issue. Filseth then charged:
1. You call people's sincerity into question without good cause.
2. You argue from authority.
3. You make invalid inferences about what people mean by what they say and challenge them to defend claims they never made.
I thoroughly rebutted his charges, and our correspondence ended with me noting our agreement "that you [Filseth] neither agree with my relevant positions nor offer any substantive argument against them".
• Paul Holbach is a philosophical German who challenged my definitions of 'world' and 'nothingness', but after asking him for alternative definitions a dozen times over two months, I called his evasions "tiresome". This prompted him to vent:
it´s your [1] unsportsmanlike [2] Mr big ego, [3] son of know-it-all kind of conduct that does repel ME! In your many posts you have shown that you´re a bright man indeed, but your [4] obstinate and sometimes [5] incomprehensibly antagonistic complacency doesn´t become your intellectual complexion. You appear as if you were much more keen on [6] self-opinionatedness than on any reasonable willingness to compromise!
Holbach never responded to my request for substantiation of the six accusations I counted above.
• Douglas aka Skeptic11@aol.com is a Christ-myth atheist who mistook me for someone interested in debating the thesis that Jesus was historical, despite me repeatedly telling him I don't bother debating the settled consensus of mainstream scholarship. When I therefore said I was throttling back the tempo of our discussion from daily to weekly by withholding an already-composed response, he wrote:
Your bizarre letter has tripped my Weirdo Alarm System so I'm going to quietly and in as non-threatening a manner as possible back away [..] Ignore the voices and take your meds.
His comment about imagined voices was ironic, since he was arguing against positions I either do not hold or explicitly said I was not interested in debating.