Richard Dawkins Lies About William Lane Craig AND Logic!

A special expanded edition for all those atheists who still haven't grasped the obvious that Dawkins played a pathetic and desperate straw man on Craig during their debate in Mexico.

To those laziest of lazy atheists, who merely want to accuse me of "propagandist editing", I say go ahead and watch the full debate! You'll find nothing has been distorted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6tIee8FwX8

Music: "Las Vegas" by Hans Zimmer (Rain Man soundtrack) and "Little Lion Man" by Mumford & Sons

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• William
• Lane
• Craig
• Mexico
• Lies
• Argument
• Straw
• man
• debate
• rational
• emotional
• logic
• antecedent
• conditional
• Does
• the
• Universe
• have
• purpose
• La
• Ciudad
• de
• las
• Ideas
• atheism
• theism
• Matt
• Ridley
• Michael
• Shermer
• Rabbi
• David
• Wolpe
• Douglas
• Geivett
• Los
• origenes
• del
• futuro
• Eddie
• Izzard
• Christianity
• heat
• death
• ontologial
• argument
• kalam
• contingency
• teleological
• teleology
• moral
• morality
• evil
• existential

[Pirate44444]

Maybe Dawkins doesn't remember every fucking word Craig said. Perhaps he didn't remember the bit where Craig said "I would be the first to say..."

Anyway if it doesn't prove God exists, why the fuck did you say it? Can't blame Dawkins for assuming Craig was trying to prove the existence of God when he said there would be no purpose of the universe without one.

[bersa888]

Fail



[ptango101]

@maxavail "to be logically valid, it only needs to be sufficient, not abundant." So do you think it is logically valid to say that the entire universe was made for us? That's like saying the whole earth was made solely for a mould spore growing on the underside of a particular rock.

[maxavail]

@ptango101 (cont.)

Well, if we are alive on Earth and we know that all these physical constants are precisely tuned to allow us to be here then it does not matter if we were the only life in the universe. In order for a piece of evidence to be logically valid, it only needs to be sufficient, not abundant.

The fine tuning and the evidence for Big Bang combined with the incoherence of the zero-volume properties-full singularity idea is what points to a Creator, making Him logically plausible.

[maxavail]

@ptango101 So you don't get why God,who made us carbon based beings,did not make us different? But if He had,wouldn't you be asking the same question? The finely tuned physical constants impact on all chemical elements, not just carbon. I fail to see why a deity that creates beings out of aluminum but can't change physical constants is more powerful than one who is able to decide the value of physical constants in order to allow carbon-based life to exist. God is an artist not a postcard printer

[ptango101]

@maxavail You seem to think that this universe was for intelligent life but in the end we are the only intelligent life we can prove (at this stage) and we can only live in a staggering small percentage of this universe. That does not point to a creator at all.