(December 14, 2018 at 5:51 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: In a way, the cited article makes a weird kind of sense for Craig: he depends on discredited mathematics as a way of supporting his discredited cosmology. In formal philosophical terms, this is know as 'circular bullshittery'.
Boru
Oh! It's worse than just his laughable Kalam Cosmological Argument and and shitty math. A couple of years ago I was into the atheist/theist debate and learned a lot about W.L.C..
He takes advantage of debate rules, well rehearsed talking points, and time limits to Gish Gallop his way through his presentations. Literally everything he says on stage sounds reasonable to people who don't know better, but he slings so much of his bullshit during his presentations that his opponents can't even begin to refute it all in their allotted time. He also likes to redirect questions by saying things like "Rather than "X = this", I think "Y = that" is a better way to illustrate "Z = something that was never asked".
