On a scale of 1-10 (10 being the most retarded), how retarded is William Lane Craig?

I mean, Ive watched him in many debates, how he ducks and weaves so cunningly out of everything thrown at him and is completely blinkered by his opponents and I just wondered to myself earlier.....am I the only one who finds him completely and utterly retarded or do other non believers see it to?

He takes forever to say NOTHING? GRRRRRRRRR....hes so f***ing irritating!!!

Tags: Craig, Lane, William

Views: 663

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Listen to Thunderfoot here. The video is about one page down and will annoy you.

Here is an earlier blog with WLC's partner (as pictured in the video above). The origional title of the post was "Evidence for god's existence" but the mods changed it. Good work.

 

On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being most stupid? Hmm... I think he gets a 73.

I think WLC is actually very intelligent, for the following reasons:

He learns enough about science to make arguments by misrepresentation. He makes his arguments with great confidence and presence, and is intentionally long-winded and overly complex to impress believers and complicate rebuttal. That combination serves him very well against less skilled debaters. Unfortunately for him, there are people like Matt Dillahunty and Sam Harris out there than can shred his web of bullshit with ease.

His ‘academic’ career is with religious based institutions where skillful preaching to the choir is more of a priority than any kind of attachment to reality, and he plays to his employers in a way that has ensured him a very comfortable living. His book writing only furthers his credentials within religious circles, and adds to his wealth.

I’m not even convinced that WLC is a believer. I think it is very possible that he is simply a very clever person who found a market that he can exploit. It would not surprise me a bit to learn later that he is actually an atheist that spent his life walking the fine line of fighting the theistic fight to earn a living, while doing so in a way that actually fuels the fires of atheism.

Actually, you run into that tactic of writing long replies being used by our atheist members. Replies with dozens of assertions and references which perhaps they think bolster their case but actually (and perhaps intentionally) functions to drive serious interlocutors away and stop the discussion.

I recently had to give up on an exchange because every exchange with the other party seemed to result in longer and longer replies. I finally had to tell myself that this is just a topical chat board. I can't be writing masters thesis-length replies to every attack on my position. I try to boil what I'm saying to what can be understood quickly and easily. Anyone who knows what they are talking about should be able to summarize their point and support it with their best argument. If the best argument doesn't work, then throwing in a half dozen or more lesser ones is a waste of the other person's time, even if it makes one feel good doing it.

RSS

Blog Posts

Invictus

Posted by Marinda on September 11, 2014 at 4:08pm 0 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service