Why do people laugh at creationists? (part 37) William Lane Craig

William Lane Craig is a master of crowing over the essentially irrelevant robust nature of certain methodologies while simultaneously misapplying such methods to draw his desired and erroneous conclusions.

In academic circles, anyone who spends a disproportionate amount of their time exhausting the praises of the reliability of logical methods (as Craig does), reeks of being a bullshit merchant as its well known the whole methodology is subject to GIGO... Garbage in, Garbage out.

Craig has 'five pillars' by which he 'proves' Christianity. Here, in Why Do People Laugh at Creationists Part 37, William Lane Craig, I address merely the first of these 'pillars'. He claims that everything that begins to exist has a cause. Well if we didn't have a few hundred years of scientific discovery under our belt showing the universe does not mold itself around human intuitions, he might have a point: however that's just not the case! The smaller and higher in energy you get, the less intuition serves you satisfactorily. And whats the problem Craig wants to apply his 'intuition' and 'inductive reasoning' to? Oh yeah, the beginning of the universe, where all of the energy/ matter of the universe was in pretty much the smallest volume we can conceive. He seems to expect that even though we have no way of currently defining such a state (it's an unknown, a gap in knowledge), that his intuitive reasoning will serve him well. You don't need to know much about science to realize that's almost a pointless exercise. Apply intuition to quantum mechanics, and you will fail. Similarly with relativity.

These are of course the scientific objections to Craigs arguments. Craig is of course merely a layman when it comes to science. A point I only bring up as Craig persistently brings up such appeals to authority when suggesting his critics are not serious because they do not possess a degree in Philosophy.

Ozmoroid has some of the best vids out there for those who really want to get to grips with relativity!
http://www.youtube.com/user/ozmoroid

• Category

  Education

[Jeff Davis]

00:09 "the universe was created out of nothing" 00:30 "things don't come into being from nothing". Which is right?

[ModestLyon]

His argument proves nothing. All he asserts is that there is a cause to the universe that transcends space and time. And he is under the delusion that this thing is somehow connected to his Christian god. You gotta love Christian logic ;)

[Coke AYCE]

fucking retarded arguments they have, how does god come from nothing? lol

[Xnerdz1]

LOL the nyan nyan spam

[Stephen Okawa]

Also, Craig is a professional "debater." He has a script he basically reads off of. If you ever watch him get "off topic," he's like a babbling retard. Go watch his debates and see what happens when they leave "too" much time for Q&A. He either dodges the questions or gets into hyperbolics about how he doesn't "accept your premise" or that he's making "metaphysical claims; hence he doesn't have to apply science!"

[Stephen Okawa]

William Lane Craig is the "educated" charlatan. He gets some non-medical or non-science-related doctorate (philosophy, what else?) and thinks he's arguing from some position of "authority." He's an apologist who has retrofitted "official sounding" words --- ontology, teleology, epistemology, etc. etc. --- into Christianity. It's worse than pseudo-science. Pseudo-science can at least be replicated. But this dumb fuck is pulling stuff straight out of a leprechaun's asshole. Fuck him.

[ReiperX]

He's an all powerful being, therefore he can do whatever he wants.

Of course he's still an idiot, but that's his explanation

[e102ewan]

He sounds like he's repeated this so many times that he's convinced himself he's right. I mean people who claim to be able to talk to dead people (for money) are the same, they often think they are actually talking to dead people. Also it sounds like the argument is worded exactly for the result he wants. He could also say "nothing which exists came out of nothing" but he says "nothing that comes into being", which sounds exactly like he had the desired result in mind when starting the test.

[helmedon1974]

I would have assumed it was Tutti Frutti.