(August 14, 2011 at 3:46 pm)5thHorseman Wrote: He may be a deluded fuckwit, but WLC is a superior debater to Sir Hitch, general consensus is WLC beat him in their matchup(even staunch atheists generally agree) It's sad, but the truth is WLC is pretty much a full time debater. He should be fucking good by now. He's still a prick.
That's the fundamental problem with a lot of these debates. The apologist is typically a skilled salesman and well versed in debate. That is, in fact, their area of expertise. The other side is usually debated by a scientist, who's primary skill is in their area of knowledge, not debate. Consequently, you've got razzle-dazzle vs. tech, style vs. substance. To the uneducated observer, the showman has the advantage since that's the medium by which the information (and bs) is presented.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
