WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-04-2014, 10:23 PM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 10:27 PM by Taqiyya Mockingbird.)
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(05-04-2014 11:49 AM)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:  
(04-04-2014 09:14 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  Um, no. Craig is a POOR debater, a fucking One Trick Pony, and his only trick is to CHEAT. SEE: Gish Gallop
I guess you're entitled to that opinion.

"That's just your opinion" is a fallacy.


Quote:But most people, especially those who have debated Craig, disagree.

Citation needed. Just because you claim something doesn't make it true.


Quote: He's even been called a "professional debater," I believe by Dawkins.

Fallacy: Appeal to misleading authority. (And Dawkins is NOT a debater).

Quote: So yeah. I think that means he is anything but a "POOR debater."

You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Quote:
Quote:I doubt that seriously.
Did you watch the debate? I doubt that as well.

Don't need to. I watched his "debate" with Harris. I know his game.

Quote:
Quote:Do you also spend hours admiring the "beauty" of a festering pile of dogshit, perchance? Really. I mean that.

If it just so happens that the history of mankind has largely been spent contemplating and disseminating to others "the 'beauty' of a festering pile of dogshit,'" then yeah, I can appreciate understanding what it is that compels many of them to do so.

Try writing a coherent reply next time.

Quote: Don't get so angry at learning opposing viewpoints. Knowledge is your friend.

Oh, look -- an ad hominem/mind-reading fallacy. You don't have a fucking clue about my mind states. And if you think Craig is a good debater, you wouldn't know knowledge if it bent you over and fucked you in the ass.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-04-2014, 10:27 PM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 10:59 PM by Taqiyya Mockingbird.)
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(05-04-2014 10:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Whenever Craig can control all of the parameters of the debate (the exact format, Craig goes first, no QA)...

And also of the topic/subject (and its assumptions) itself -- which I thought Harris was a fucking idiot the last go-round for agreeing to. It was loaded from the start.


Glad Hitch picked up on the "If atheism is true..." bullshit Craig pulls -- I was just rolling my eyes when Harris let Craig walk all over him with that.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2014, 06:47 AM (This post was last modified: 07-04-2014 07:11 AM by Pickup_shonuff.)
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
I'm well aware of the context Dawkins was referring. Taq, you must be an utter moron to not be aware of the many references by atheists, some of whom have actually debated Craig, acknowledging his well known debate skIlls. There's this thing called Google. Use it sometime so that you don't come across as the dipshit you are.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2014, 07:35 AM (This post was last modified: 07-04-2014 07:46 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(06-04-2014 10:27 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(05-04-2014 10:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Whenever Craig can control all of the parameters of the debate (the exact format, Craig goes first, no QA)...

And also of the topic/subject (and its assumptions) itself -- which I thought Harris was a fucking idiot the last go-round for agreeing to. It was loaded from the start.


Glad Hitch picked up on the "If atheism is true..." bullshit Craig pulls -- I was just rolling my eyes when Harris let Craig walk all over him with that.

Agreed, but he didn't fall for the Gish Gallop nor did he jump onto Craig's disingenuous misquoting other than to point it out. Also Harris' second volley was devastating.




[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
07-04-2014, 08:37 AM
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(07-04-2014 07:35 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 10:27 PM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  And also of the topic/subject (and its assumptions) itself -- which I thought Harris was a fucking idiot the last go-round for agreeing to. It was loaded from the start.


Glad Hitch picked up on the "If atheism is true..." bullshit Craig pulls -- I was just rolling my eyes when Harris let Craig walk all over him with that.

Agreed, but he didn't fall for the Gish Gallop nor did he jump onto Craig's disingenuous misquoting other than to point it out. Also Harris' second volley was devastating.





Agreed. I'm waiting for the day when someone opens up with, "Ladies and gentlemen, what you have just experienced is a 'Gish Gallop'. Don't be fooled: here's why..."

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
07-04-2014, 08:46 AM
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(07-04-2014 06:47 AM)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:  I'm well aware of the context Dawkins was referring. Taq, you must be an utter moron to not be aware of the many references by atheists, some of whom have actually debated Craig, acknowledging his well known debate skIlls. There's this thing called Google. Use it sometime so that you don't come across as the dipshit you are.


I have already pointed out that Craig's "skills" are nothing but smoke, mirrors and cheats. And Craig "debates" people who know little to nothing about how to debate and don't know to call him on his cheats. YOU are the ignorant and gullible dipshit who is impressed with The Emperor's New Clothes.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2014, 07:16 PM
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(07-04-2014 08:46 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  
(07-04-2014 06:47 AM)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:  I'm well aware of the context Dawkins was referring. Taq, you must be an utter moron to not be aware of the many references by atheists, some of whom have actually debated Craig, acknowledging his well known debate skIlls. There's this thing called Google. Use it sometime so that you don't come across as the dipshit you are.


I have already pointed out that Craig's "skills" are nothing but smoke, mirrors and cheats. And Craig "debates" people who know little to nothing about how to debate and don't know to call him on his cheats. YOU are the ignorant and gullible dipshit who is impressed with The Emperor's New Clothes.

The only thing I'm impressed with is how high you get smelling your own shit. I suggest you'd benefit more if you tried to stick to facts and not merely your own prejudices. None of what you said is relevant. The fact is, regardless of the merit of Craig's arguments, he's very skilled at formulating his thoughts in an almost flawed exhibition of part philosophy, part sophistry. Who knows, you might learn a thing or two if you chose not to act like an ignorant fool in the fight against religion.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-04-2014, 07:38 PM
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(07-04-2014 07:16 PM)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:  The fact is, regardless of the merit of Craig's arguments, he's very skilled at formulating his thoughts in an almost flawed exhibition of part philosophy, part sophistry.

Yes... But that's the thing, isn't it?

Do "debate skills" mean ability to present cogent arguments? That sure doesn't describe ol' WLC. Does it mean ability to bloviate? On that count he probably tops the leaderboards...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like cjlr's post
07-04-2014, 07:51 PM
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(07-04-2014 07:16 PM)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:  The fact is, regardless of the merit of Craig's arguments, he's very skilled at formulating his thoughts in an almost flawed exhibition of part philosophy, part sophistry. Who knows, you might learn a thing or two if you chose not to act like an ignorant fool in the fight against religion.

Wouldn't that be a "flawless" exhibition ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
08-04-2014, 12:10 AM
RE: WLC debated Sean M. Carroll a few weeks ago on origins and Kalam Argument
(07-04-2014 07:16 PM)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:  
(07-04-2014 08:46 AM)Taqiyya Mockingbird Wrote:  I have already pointed out that Craig's "skills" are nothing but smoke, mirrors and cheats. And Craig "debates" people who know little to nothing about how to debate and don't know to call him on his cheats. YOU are the ignorant and gullible dipshit who is impressed with The Emperor's New Clothes.

The only thing I'm impressed with is how high you get smelling your own shit.

Was that supposed to be some kind of pathetic attempt at an insult? FAIL.


Quote: I suggest you'd benefit more if you tried to stick to facts and not merely your own prejudices.

I pointed out the FACTS -- Craig relies on the Gish Gallop. He's a one-trick fucking pony and he couldn't stand up in a REAL debate if his life depended on it. Just because you're too fucking stupid and willfully ignorant doesn't make my assessment "prejudiced".

Quote: None of what you said is relevant.

Bullshit. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.


Quote:The fact is, regardless of the merit of Craig's arguments,

There ARE no fucking merits to his "arguments".

Quote: he's very skilled at formulating his thoughts

No, he's not. He relies on the credulity of his audience of sheeple, and the inexperience and the naivete' of his opponents.


Quote:in an almost flawed exhibition of part philosophy, part sophistry.

It's ALL sophistry. Semantic prestidigitation and full-on disingenuous tomfuckery. He wouldn't stand a chance againste ANYONE here in the Boxing Ring, where he can't cheat.

Quote: Who knows, you might learn a thing or two if you chose not to act like an ignorant fool in the fight against religion.
-- Says the fucking moron who is oh so impressed with Craig's bullshittery. Rolleyes Fuck you. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: