Part 8 - Dinesh D'Souza Debates Daniel Dennett

HAHAHAHAHAHA Daniel tried to change the argument HEHEHEHE HOHOHOHOHO

HAHAHAHAHAHA Daniel tried to change the argument HEHEHEHE HOHOHOHOHO

He had to as Dinesh went all over the place. Unlike Dinesh, Dennett knows the rule of debate and addresses the point of his opponent and not just preach speculations.

oops double soz

Again - said the puddle "look at this hole! It fits me perfectly! Surely god has made this world for me." This is D'Souza's argument and it makes perfect sense - to the puddle.

I wish brilliant men like Dennett didn't have to spend their time refuting the ranting blather of delusional blowhards like D'Souza. What time and energy we waste countering the arguments of the irrational. I'm afraid if they believe what they claim, they are insane and no amount of talk will convince them otherwise.

Well, actually, that'd be an argument from personal incredulity. And neither can we employ the argument of asking him for proof for god as our stances are both speculations on contemporary ideas; however justify that may seem as the burden lies on the believer to present evidence.

How the hell does Dinesh sleep at night....

I am sure Dinesh yells in his sleep too.

You are wrong. Dinesh may be an idiot, but he is an individual, and your racial perspectives are not official and not shared by all minorities.

Right, Hitchens wasted Craig by:

1) Not understanding the Kalam argument
2) Failing to refute the Teleological argument (giving ammo to Craig with evolution)!
3) Distorting the Ontological Moral argument into an Epistemological one
4) Staw-manning NT Wright
5) Evading Craig's cross-examination by filibuster
6) Failing to define whether or not he was agnostic or atheist, ultimately defining himself as someone who asserts "there is no God" but without any supportive arguments.

Well done Hitch.