Why Something Rather Than Nothing?

[Alex K]

It would be an ad hominem fallacy if the reasons I presented were irrelevant to the argument being had. Do you deny that Craig's position, "I will disregard anything that does not already agree with me," in addition to his history of deliberate distortion of science, is relevant to his argument?

You don't even know the details of the argument you are rejecting....so you can't credibly say anything about it.

Its sad because your hatred of Craig is preventing you from learning some critical thinking skills.

Haha, slow down there, Heywood. Esq. didn't mean that he rejects WLCs arguments simply because he has "presup conman" written on his business card. It was obviously a shorthand for saying that WLCs arguments are the tricks of a presuppositionalist conman and therefore invalid.
There is only one way critical thinking skills are to be learned from Craig - by listening to him and identifying his lies and fallacies.