(July 5, 2015 at 9:38 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 5, 2015 at 6:15 pm)Beccs Wrote: You know the strength of the argument when people start referring to WLC.
Who next, Ken Ham? Ray Comfort? Kent Hovind (with a screaming match because we refuse to refer to him as 'Dr')?
Ironically, I know the weakness of YOUR argument (and that of Esquilax) when you engage in ad hominem arguments against WLC rather than deal with his ideas instead.
Possibly. But every debate I've watched from WLC is the same - no counter arguments, just "I know he exists" type comments and desperate attempts to justify the heinous acts of the deity.
Hardly strong debating skills. It's on par with a child sticking his fingers in his ears, stamping his foot and screaming "I won't listen!"
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni:
"You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"
