(August 21, 2016 at 1:47 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:(August 21, 2016 at 11:25 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: So, since Steve didn't do very well trying persuade us that his 2,000 year old book of hearsay is "irrefutable proof" of God, he's now over here arguing the "you can't prove evolution" ignorance fallacy?
...Which has been shot down ad nauseam, and has nothing to do with building a positive case for Christianity....
What a complete waste of everyone's time. Thanks, man.
They always seem like they will be different coming out of the gate, don't they? Then their true colors show. It's exasperating, but I try to remind myself that it's probably inevitable given the shitty position from which they have to argue. But any time I see Protestants referencing WLC with straight faces, they automatically go into my mental dust bin.
I suppose that's why I esteem Wooters most highly among our Christians. He at least has the good sense to restrict himself to philosophical arguments so as not to get hogtied to the holy book and its ridiculous claims (yes, he accepts it as true -- though not always literally -- but I can't recall seeing him put on the exegetical dunce cap and doing the Fundie dance). And he understands science and the philosophy of science too well to go down the evolution-isn't-demonstrated path.
Yeah...it really is still amazing to me, even after almost a year here. They DO seem different at first, and then the familiar algorithm of contrived and fallacious arguments start to pop up. Never fails to sadden me, no matter how predictable it has become.
Yes, I've noticed Wooters is careful about not jumping into threads related to scripture. He knows he's safer on the philosophical outside (so to speak).
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
