Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011)

[DeistPaladin]

What I find especially entertaining is that you're not even embarrassed about what you wrote.

You can attempt to patronise me if you want, but you've been made to look a royal fuckhead in this thread, so why don't you just drop it, like you should have when you didn't check in for three weeks and it had died the first time?

As I've argued with apologists, I've found that you can class them into distinct species and even predict their patterns and subroutines. Apologists have no store of artifacts nor can they present their miracle working powers for peer review (contrary to how Jesus promised they should be able to in Mark 16). Having no substance, they hone their styles hoping the razzle-dazzle will distract from the lack of supporting evidence or the fallacious nature of their arguments.

Ryft is the sleazy pseudo-intellectual breed of apologist.

Salesmen like him dress up their faith with philoso-babble, sprinkle on a few Latin phrases and deliver it with a pompous and condescending demeanor. The objective is not just to put an academic face on what is in reality an anti-intellectual religion but, more importantly, to slyly needle and provoke the atheist. The hope, I'm convinced by observing their behavior, is that the nose-in-the-air will inspire a verbal punch to be thrown. Once this happens, that they are called an arrogant ass or worse, they put their hands on their hearts with feigned shock and go into "oh my, what was that all about" mode. At this point, they've attained their goal, to put themselves on an academic pedestal and cast the atheist as the crude name-caller.

I've found that the best way to counter the pseudo-intellectual breed is to maintain a level head and always keep them in their place. Ignore the snippy tone, keep an eye on the burden of proof (that they don't try to drop it off in your back yard while you're not looking) and hold their feet to the fire. As you burn away all the unwarranted assumptions, special pleading and non sequiturs, they'll try to slip away utilizing red herrings and the technique of poisoning the well. Keep the conversation coming back to the subject at hand.

Eventually, they break and you can catch them in a lie. People like Ryft are not surprisingly liars, as I have busted him for lying, and curiously not ashamed when they're caught. Their response is usually to lie about their lies. Perhaps they have lied for so long, the nature has become compulsive? Regardless, in this modern medium of communication, you can always "go back to the tape" and review their own words.