RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 20, 2014 at 1:56 pm
(December 20, 2014 at 12:59 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Oh, so you want to take the path of sophistry, rather than factual inaccuracy? Okay...
If this is the way you want to go, then I'll just remind you that in that case, Hovind is speaking in irrelevancies, rather than inaccuracies. He's clearly talking about biological evolution, his early slides were almost exclusively biology textbooks, he quotes Dawkins talking about biological evolution- and then purports to respond directly to Dawkins on that point- before leaping directly to astronomy, which again, has nothing to do with the topic he's talking about.
So which is it, H_M? Is he wrong, or Gish Galloping? Neither says anything particularly positive about his argument against evolution, nor about your desperate need to defend him: "No, you don't understand! He wasn't wrong, he'd just immediately spun off on something completely unconnected to the topic at hand moments after starting the meat of his presentation!"
And I'd remind you, the fact that "cosmic evolution" is unconnected with what he was attempting to debunk was my sole point. You called me wrong, while confirming that I was right.
Oh c'monnnn. Name me a part in the video where he said something that was factually wrong, REGARDING MACROEVOLUTION. You can't, can you?
