Evangelists Challenge Atheists to Bible-Less Debate

SpacedTeddyBear · Post by **SpacedTeddyBear** » 2007-05-01 02:20am

Damn. Talk about major inadequacy issues here. Regardless, the fundies will claim victory no matter how hard they get stomped on, simply because there's one teensy little thing that hasn't been explained by evolution yet which completely disproves everything about evolution and all of science.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2007-05-01 02:29am

Is it just me, or Kirk Cameron like a turd that won't flush?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2007-05-01 03:06am

Superman wrote:Is it just me, or Kirk Cameron like a turd that won't flush?

A "Cling-On", if you will.

SpacedTeddyBear · Post by **SpacedTeddyBear** » 2007-05-01 03:11am

At least a turd had once been something useful and or tasty. Cameron was neither both before and after he became a D-league actor. Therefore my hypothesis that he's doing this out of simple inadequacy in his professional and perhaps private life.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2007-05-01 03:26am

SpacedTeddyBear wrote:At least a turd had once been something useful and or tasty. Cameron was neither both before and after he became a D-league actor. Therefore my hypothesis that he's doing this out of simple inadequacy in his professional and perhaps private life.

Of course. He's a screwball, just like any other fundamentalist. He had a fucked up childhood where he worked and didn't bond with his parents, and now he's found his identity and the 'eternal father' who will always be there for him... probably.

At any rate, he's a screwball.

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2007-05-01 04:52pm

These clowns have rote memorized attacks that sound to any rational mind like a snake-oil advertisement. However, as someone who's taken out two of these bastards in public demonstration, they really don't know how to react when they're surprised.

The proper way to handle them is to prominently, confidently and politely make them stumble by forcing the ball on their turf. Like mentioning if they don't believe in radioisotope dating, they don't believe in physics. Which by necessity means chemistry is nonsense. Then biology doesn't work... (etc).

Just throw them something they must address that's not on their pre-made list of canned sound bytes, and they sink like rocks. A habit seems to be for them to throw a last-word-in, then huff-off in obvious defeat, while telling themselves that they won.

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2007-05-01 05:26pm

I understand the sensationalist mindset that wouldn't even consider a written exchange under contemporary circumstances, but if nothing else both teams should be provided with large screens behind them for their own crew to use to post relevant data to support their claims during the broadcast. It'd help eliminate some of the fiat claimstaking that goes on in these debates.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-05-01 05:30pm

Yeah, they're kind of like a computer game AI. It can take you by surprise if you're overconfident, but if you take the time to study its patterns, you swiftly realize that it's really stupid, and its biggest asset is cheating.

Oni Koneko Damien · Post by **Oni Koneko Damien** » 2007-05-02 07:20pm

I will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists.”

And like anyone wishing to show that this is real, he will immediately submit it to peer review to show it's not a vacuous pile of...

...oh wait, no he isn't. Nevermind, I'm not even interested anymore.

Post by **Dalton** » 2007-05-03 03:43am

Man! Look at them go. Still clinging to the last lingering shreds of a once world-dominating mythology, refusing to accept the inevitable.

Icehawk · Post by **Icehawk** » 2007-05-06 07:31pm

Sooooo. I take it these two morons chickened out? The debate was supposed to be yesterday wasnt it?

Singular Intellect · Post by **Singular Intellect** » 2007-05-06 08:07pm

Darth Wong wrote:Yeah, they're kind of like a computer game AI. It can take you by surprise if you're overconfident, but if you take the time to study its patterns, you swiftly realize that it's really stupid, and its biggest asset is cheating.

I love that analogy...gonna have to remember it.

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2007-05-07 01:15am

SirNitram wrote:Meh. When they've the balls for a written debate, citing peer-reviewed papers and similar things(After all, they claim it's 'scientific proof of God!'), with a time limit, then alert me. This is just more attention-whoring.

You can't compete in a debate requiring things that you do not have, and don't exist anywhere.

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2007-05-07 01:17am

Icehawk wrote:Sooooo. I take it these two morons chickened out? The debate was supposed to be yesterday wasnt it?

I think it'll be available for viewing on May 9th, hopefully unedited.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2007-05-07 06:35am

According to accounts from folks who were in the audience, the big nasty Evolution-destroying formulation, Mister Comfort's magnum opus, is...the Coke-Can argument. A Coca-cola can shows evidence of design, so the universe shows evidence of design, so God exists. It's the Watchmaker argument for the modern mob.

SilverWingedSeraph · Post by **SilverWingedSeraph** » 2007-05-07 08:01am

Molyneux wrote:According to accounts from folks who were in the audience, the big nasty Evolution-destroying formulation, Mister Comfort's magnum opus, is...the Coke-Can argument. A Coca-cola can shows evidence of design, so the universe shows evidence of design, so God exists. It's the Watchmaker argument for the modern mob.

Wait, wtf!? That doesn't prove a goddamn thing, let alone prove it scientificly. Who in the hell could honestly believe that this disproves evolution?

Ritterin Sophia · Post by **Ritterin Sophia** » 2007-05-07 08:40am

So who designed the designer?

Jericho Kross · Post by **Jericho Kross** » 2007-05-07 10:24am

General Schatten wrote:So who designed the designer?

I don't know but it sure makes some of the religious nuts at my school shut up.

Metatwaddle · Post by **Metatwaddle** » 2007-05-07 11:35am

According to the Friendly Atheist blog, the debate has been taped. It'll be available for viewing on Wednesday. The atheists seem to be confident about how it went, although they apparently mixed up some transitional fossils and the laws of thermodynamics.

I have to admit, I wish there were someone else doing the debating (Dawkins?). From what I've seen of the Rational Response Squad (whose leaders were the ones debating for the atheist side), I haven't been that impressed. They're heavy on the "yay science, boo superstition" rhetoric, but their arguments aren't very original. Also, the Blasphemy Challenge, in addition to being fairly useless attention-whoring, seems to be a bit misled. The actual unforgivable sin, it seems from the text, isn't to deny the existence of the Holy Spirit, but to say that the works of the Holy Spirit are actually the works of demons.

Ritterin Sophia · Post by **Ritterin Sophia** » 2007-05-07 11:45am

The Rational Response Squad is one of those 'Nice' Atheist Organizations, which is why it didn't appeal to me, I much prefered the Proposed 'In-Your-Face' Style of what was originally going to be the Atheist Scum United. But NO, some people just couldn't help but bring around a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.

Fire Fly · Post by **Fire Fly** » 2007-05-09 06:56am

I watched a part of the debate and I wasn't very impressed. The atheists comes off with what seems to be a lack of an intuitive scientific understanding and in inability to clearly articulate scientific principles and to use specific examples. Saying that science has demonstrated a point many times over and over is not sufficient, as an argument, in my opinion. To really rebuke a creationist, you have to employ overwhelming examples and constantly poke holes in their arguments. However, this just may be me since I wasn't really interested in the creationists and I was more or less critiquing the atheists. Overall, it seemed mediocre and bland but a good effort.

OmegaGuy · Post by **OmegaGuy** » 2007-05-09 11:24am

Link to clips of the debate: http://www.rationalresponders.com/

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2007-05-09 11:31am

General Schatten wrote:The Rational Response Squad is one of those 'Nice' Atheist Organizations, which is why it didn't appeal to me, I much prefered the Proposed 'In-Your-Face' Style of what was originally going to be the Atheist Scum United. But NO, some people just couldn't help but bring around a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.

They might be nice, but I see them more as a rabid atheist organization, and their Blasphemy Challenge demonstrates their stupidity.

TithonusSyndrome · Post by **TithonusSyndrome** » 2007-05-09 12:33pm

That and their obnoxious choice in music en route to the debate. Anyone who can tolerate Pantera has a skull with an extra half-inch of bone, at the expense of brain volume.

Ritterin Sophia · Post by **Ritterin Sophia** » 2007-05-09 03:23pm

Kamakazie Sith wrote:
General Schatten wrote:The Rational Response Squad is one of those 'Nice' Atheist Organizations, which is why it didn't appeal to me, I much prefered the Proposed 'In-Your-Face' Style of what was originally going to be the Atheist Scum United. But NO, some people just couldn't help but bring around a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.
They might be nice, but I see them more as a rabid atheist organization, and their Blasphemy Challenge demonstrates their stupidity.

Rabid? How so?