William Lane 'Two Citations' Craig, Academic Midget

William Lane Craig likes to think of himself as an academic, an intellectual and if you believe his fans, 'is regarded by many as one of the worlds leading in Christian Apologetics'. Well that's all fine and dandy until you actually check out William Lane Craigs track record in the peer review literature. See it turns out that William Lane Craig is a champion in academic circles only in the category of publishing 'uncitable junk'.
In academia 'the size of your balls' is largely determined how many papers you've written, and how many citations they pick up: basically how many interesting papers you've written. Turns out William Lane Craigs papers pull in on average about 2 citations, with his top citated work pulling something like a dozen citations. That's an absolutely farcical track record. Personally I find it difficult to see how the man can have such a high opinion of himself when his citations record is so poor. Indeed, by this metric, I've know people who have surpassed the entire contribution of WLCs academic career merely a couple of years after getting a PhD.

Normally I would let this sort of thing slide, apart from the man is such a professional slimeball in his dealings with the likes of Richard Dawkins that I figure his dirty little secret needs a little exposure. I mean with an ego like Craigs, you know the one thing that will cut his ego deeper than any insult is rubbing his nose in his utterly lack-luster citations record.

Personally I think he should hereafter be referred to as William Lane 'Two Citations' Craig, or he gets antsy about his credentials, Dr 'Two Citations' Craig.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Christian
• apologetics
• Richard
• dawkins
• academic
• track
• record
• thunderf00t
• WLC
• Midget
• laughable
• funny
• professional
• philosopher
• university
• debate
• comedy
• Humour
• College
• Joke
• Fun
• Laugh

[Valk0010iv]

Says that when dawkins talks about philosophy he is only a laymen. Well then your a laymen to scientific questions. When was the last time I saw your physics degree WLC? Be consistent at the very least.

[JACKtheRIPP3R189]

@MoonwalkerWorshiper "these sandbox kindergarten insults aren't arguments"

Which is precisely why I don't claim your personal stupidity and ignorance have anything to do with Craig's arguments being fallacious. You still don't seem to have figured out the difference between an ad hominem argument and a regular insult. I call Craig what I do for the same reason I call a crow a bird: they both fit the description.

[alienisuntverus]

I find it sad that the porn industry has been more useful to humanity than the entirety of theology. Face it guys, all you're really doing is making up word games to prove the existence of a being that you have already made unprovable. Find an actual job or something.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@JACKtheRIPP3R189 [if you were a liar it's not like you're going to come out and admit it]

If you say you tell the truth and I'm willfully ignorant, I can say you're deluding yourself because you have shit for brains and I'm the one seeking rational justification for believing certain things. Tit for tat.

[I insult you because you repeatedly show yourself to deserve it]

What a shame that I don't deserve it then. You're wasting energy on that childish crap.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@JACKtheRIPP3R189 [Being willfully ignorant isn't an excuse]

How lucky I am then that I don't apply willful ignorance, but instead rely on evidence and evidence only. When someone makes a declarative statement I'm not going to believe that statement until it is backed up with evidence. Unfortunaley you don't seem to share that attitude with me Ripper. You prefer to keep make statements and insult me because I don't agree with you on face value.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@JACKtheRIPP3R189 Given that about 70% of your commentary consists of insults and 30% are declarative statements lacking motivation, you strongly give the impression that you think your insults makes you right about everything you say.

It's called circular reasoning. Because you call me dumb, it means I'm dumb, because you called me dumb. Actually that makes YOU dumb. Even the dumbest baby could see through this unbelievably braindead bullshit.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@JACKtheRIPP3R189 Funny how you remove my comments but let your own remain. Nobody is going to understand who you were talking to. Anyway Is saved what I wrote.

Every insult is your every comment and not one single comment of yours can survive without an insult in it.

[I'm not going to take you seriously ]

From the get go you have never took me seriously, but I on the other hand have a good reason to not take YOU seriously; because of your insults you rely upon.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

(con) like things about me or Craig or logic or theology or science. That's why I complain about being insulted. Because it's useless. But you seem to have finally learned something, even if it goes very slow.

Sigh, the comment limit exceeder is a bitch and I'd prefer PM but I suppose you wouldn't be interested in that either, so here it is a freaking ocean of comments - from the both of us actually. I'll also address your channel comments while at it. It's fun.

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

(con) whether you think I've been hurt by your insults or not. In fact JackassRipper, I think you are desperately trying to tell yourself I'm mad because of your insults. If you didn't tell yourself that (ignoring the evidence in the comment section here) your self-confidence would be at risk. And obviously your self-confidence and "feel good about yourself" strategy is WAY more important to you than to actually believe things that are true (con)

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

(con) gets very DRAINED very quick because you make up these attributes as you go along instead of comparing evidence to my way of handling it. You insist on keep telling me that you know the truth and I'm willfully ignorant, but if anybody looks at the discussion going on that's hardly how it really is. And giving me these psych outs again and again is not going to fucking save you. When you're done insulting me I'll just get back to the topic whether you like it or not (con)

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

(con) Anyway there is no "denial" or "willful ignorance" from my part because our discussion about Craigs argumentation have BARELY even BEGAN, because of you and your childish fucking obtuse ways of writing comments slows the progress down. If you keep make 10 replies for each round, where 9 replies are ad hominems calling me ignorant and 1 reply address the actual content of Craig and his argument, your reasons for actually believing me to be ignorant (con)

[MoonwalkerWorshiper]

@JACKtheRIPP3R189 [his logic is rife with glaring errors.]

Ok buddy that's another declarative statement as usual, now back it up by showing WHAT logic is rife with WHAT errors and I'll defend it. If you're not gonna do that you can stop replying to me.

[reduce denial and willful ignorance, improve maturity and education]

Weren't you the guy who complained that I regurgitated everything you said? Well here you are, imitating my way of talking. (con)