Debating William Lane Craig….

    Can you debate William Lane Craig? Well my immediate response is whats the point?  It’s quite easy to show that William Lane Craig essentially delivers exactly the same ‘debate’ almost by rote.

 

   Popular debates favor style over substance, which is why the ‘debate’ is an irrelevance in the acquisition of knowledge.  In areas of contention, you propose experiments capable of distinguishing the various proposed models.  You then go and perform said experiments and the knowledge of mankind moves forwards.   Notably Craig will NEVER makes any testable predictions, which is why his arguments never change and he never moves forward.

    In this sense you might as well ‘debate’ a recording of William Lane Craig as William Lane Craig himself, as intellectually the physical presence of the man adds nothing to the forum.  Incidentally, I can also tell you from personal experience that this is why watching William Lane Craig debates gets so terribly monotonous.  It really is ‘pull the draw string’ and watch the man espouse the rigorous gold standards of the virtues of logic immediately prior to remorselessly and unproductively sodomizing them with a large, rusty and particularly unpleasant looking metal pipe.

   Now none of that would actually be a problem if Craig was presenting some devastating argument that no one could address, but that’s simply not the case. Craig merely rattles off his ‘5 pillars’, conveniently forgetting to tell people that none of these arguments actually convinced him that god exists, they just form a conformational bias on his ‘personal interaction’ with god.  In that sense the only argument that actually needs to be addressed is the one that convinced Craig, and boy how simple it is to address!

   People all around the world have these personal interactions with different ‘Gods’.

The ‘gods’ people people have personal relationships with seem to depend remarkably on where in the world you live!

   Now Craig will be the first to stand up and say ‘but that doesn’t logically prove my God doesn’t exist’.  Well yeah sure, but it does put Craigs personal relationship with ‘God’ into the exact same deeply unconvincing category that Craig puts everybody elses ‘God’s into.  Bizarrely it is this exact deeply unconvincing argument that is the very foundation of Craigs belief in ‘God’, and it is upon these foundation of sand he builds his pillars of conformational bias.

Reasonablefaith.org scramble to hide the evidence!

  Well initially I was willing to give William Lane Craig the benefit of the doubt, but I have to admit, the charity of that position is evaporating faster than dew in the desert!

  So a thread was started on the ‘Reasonable Faith’ forum (forum of William Lane Craigs website).

  In this drcraigvideos was making posts suggesting that he was fully legally endorsed by William Lane Craig to file these DMCAs.

  Now up till this point, I was happy to believe that, “well these ‘reasonable faith’ people, they’re not crazy creationists, they must be able to see the writing on the wall here”.  So, after one of the admins  (Philos, who lists his profession as ‘In academia’ (wlc?)) had locked the thread earlier this evening, I wrote him a personal message telling him of the shit that they were in.  How drcraigvideos claim to be legally acting on William Lane Craigs behalf made him legally culpable, and that drcraigvideos actions had a ring of truth about them given that:

1) drcraigvideos blog is directly linked on the reasonablefaith website.

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=links

2) drcraigvideos videos are directly linked to the reasonablefaith website.  Damn, you only have to click the links in the scrolling banner to find this out!

  I also gave him some brief background on why what drcraigvideos was doing was illegal, and why it was in their favor to take action on this themselves.  Lets be real, it is at this point unthinkable given the number of emails reasonablefaith must have received that they are not aware of the situation (I also left them a voice message and asked this admin, Philos, to pass on this message to WLC).  If William Lane Craig chooses to do nothing while someone acting in his name, and claiming with his permission is filing bogus DMCA claims against WLC critics, it is VERY challenging to find an academically charitable way to interpret William Lane Craigs behavior.

  So I come back an hour or so later, and what do I find?

1) I’ve been banned.  Cute! Being banned without a SINGLE post!

2) the ENTIRE thread of ‘Thunderf00t DMCAed in William Lane Craigs name’ has been deleted.

Can’t really screen cap something that’s not there, but look for this post yourself!

  I blame myself.  I had assumed that when dealing with ‘Professional Academic Philosophers’ that you might get some integrity.  Instead all I’ve seen is reasonablefaith using EXACTLY and VERBATIM the methods used by PCS those many moons ago.  Dig a hole, then try to delete everything incriminating as soon as possible, then claim it never happened.  Shit, I’ve not seem someone scramble to delete the damning data this quickly since a creationist first donned Joker make-up! Oh yes WLC, I have EVERYTHING recorded 🙂