I cannot help by feel it gives these shitbirds recognition they don't deserve. How can there be actual debate where one side is totally comfy with "lying for Jesus" while the other is held to a personal assessment of intellectual and scientific integrity?

(September 18, 2015 at 8:29 am)houseofcantor Wrote: I cannot help by feel it gives these shitbirds recognition they don't deserve. How can there be actual debate where one side is totally comfy with "lying for Jesus" while the other is held to a personal assessment of intellectual and scientific integrity?

They already have recognition they don't deserve. I think these debates serve to expose the lies.

(September 18, 2015 at 8:37 am)Lemonvariable72 Wrote:

(September 18, 2015 at 8:29 am)houseofcantor Wrote: I cannot help by feel it gives these shitbirds recognition they don't deserve. How can there be actual debate where one side is totally comfy with "lying for Jesus" while the other is held to a personal assessment of intellectual and scientific integrity?

They already have recognition they don't deserve. I think these debates serve to expose the lies.

Would be better to throw cream pies.

TBH, I get Kent Hovind, Eric Hovind and Ken Ham all mixed up.

But who the fuck cares? It's like the godhead: you get three for the intellectual equivalence of one.

I think you're overestimating the level of intellect somewhat, but I agree with the point.

(September 18, 2015 at 8:58 am)houseofcantor Wrote:

(September 18, 2015 at 8:37 am)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: They already have recognition they don't deserve. I think these debates serve to expose the lies.

Would be better to throw cream pies.

Shit would work better. Your idea be a waste of good pie.

Maybe Thunderfoot could just laugh constantly at everything Hovind says, and not debate at all? I'd pay to watch that.

This is a really, really scary and dangerous video about the Footster taking on the spawn of the possible opponent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9BfsHsVGNg

(September 17, 2015 at 9:34 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: The issue is that the creationists are already being taken seriously by a non critical audience. If no one challenges them they just spread their bullshit unopposed.

That's the conundrum, yes, but I don't think a formal debate is the proper way to challenge. That forum should be left for two competing ideas, so inviting a creationist to a debate implies that creationism is on the same playing field as science. Creationism needs to be laughed at like the absurd theory it is, which means treating it like the flat-earthers.

Honestly, I think the only way to truly eradicate this nonsense is with a ground up approach through better education. Sure, you'll need to supplement it with other efforts like organizations that specifically combat creationits' stupidity, but I think without giving kids a good formal education, it's all for naught.

It's better to give kids the tools to poke holes in creationist garbage than to do it ourselves.

(September 18, 2015 at 8:29 am)houseofcantor Wrote: I cannot help by feel it gives these shitbirds recognition they don't deserve. How can there be actual debate where one side is totally comfy with "lying for Jesus" while the other is held to a personal assessment of intellectual and scientific integrity?

This is also a really good point. Why invite people to a game that have proven they don't intend to play fairly?

(September 18, 2015 at 3:22 pm)robvalue Wrote: Maybe Thunderfoot could just laugh constantly at everything Hovind says, and not debate at all? I'd pay to watch that.

This is a really, really scary and dangerous video about the Footster taking on the spawn of the possible opponent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9BfsHsVGNg

  I've seen that little video twice now and I strongly suggest not watching it.  It is indeed an exercise in frustration.