Atheist Admits Assumptions About Evil

[Stripe]

point out how many reputable people disagree with your opponent...

 

[allsmiles]

You're a coward, allsmiles.

:yawn:

I've been fairly upfront about why I wouldn't waste my time calling Enyart, and why no one else should waste their time as well in that endeavor. If he wants to talk to me he knows where to find me and he's had his chance and backed away. I don't think I'm very scary but if I thought Enyart would hang me out to dry I wouldn't open my big mouth and talk smack about him right under his nose.

Gimme my rep back or shut up.

 

[allsmiles]

Atheist Rules for Debate

When your side is on the losing end of a debate:

1. Claim your opponent is mentally deranged.

1. I'm not an atheist :nono:

2. Bob and I weren't debating

2. Claim your opponent is using strawman arguments especially when he has accurately stated your case.

Like I said, Bob and I weren't debating. I was telling people why I wouldn't waste my time and breath on him. Fortunately he has a radio show and leaves the proof of my assertions on the record. No one has to take your word for it, or mine. They can find out for themselves that I'm not mischaracterizing Enyart

3. Claim that factors totally outside the debated issue prejudiced the debate "causing" one to lose.

:darwinsm:

I'm not the one who talks over his debate opponents, that's Enyart.

 

[Lighthouse]

Not only are you a coward, you're also whiny.:nono:

 

[allsmiles]

Not only are you a coward, you're also whiny.:nono:

That's rich comin' from you dude :chuckle:

I don't have to prove anything Lighthouse :nono: That you don't understand this makes me wonder about the color of your stomach.

 

[Granite]

Not only are you a coward, you're also whiny.:nono:

:rotfl:

Irony, thy name is Brandon.

 

[koban]

Not only are you a coward, you're also whiny.:nono:

That may be Brandon, but at least he's not gay. :think:

 

[Turbo]

That may be Brandon, but at least he's not gay. :think:

You return from banishment, and this is the first post you make?

Do you prefer being banned or what?

 

[Granite]

:doh:

Hoo boy.

 

[Frank Ernest]

point out how many reputable people disagree with your opponent...

Addendum:

6. Appeal to authority - if said authority agrees with you.

As in: Gort Frazmaz, PhD DSC PDQ XYZ who has advanced degrees in Paratheologicalpolysyndentonism agrees with me. (Oddy enough, the folks who use the reputable, undisputed authority argument are the same folks who are urging everyone to "question authority.")

 

[Frank Ernest]

1. I'm not an atheist :nono:

2. Bob and I weren't debating

Denial. It never happened.

Like I said, Bob and I weren't debating. I was telling people why I wouldn't waste my time and breath on him. Fortunately he has a radio show and leaves the proof of my assertions on the record. No one has to take your word for it, or mine. They can find out for themselves that I'm not mischaracterizing Enyart

I'm not the one who talks over his debate opponents, that's Enyart.

See Atheist Rules for Debate.

 

[koban]

You return from banishment, and this is the first post you make?

Do you prefer being banned or what?

I'm sorry Turbo, you must have thought I was talking to you.

I wasn't. I was talking to the whiny hypocrite.

No need to apologize.

 

[ThePhy]

Just listened to the archived show. Interesting show, but I was surprised to hear Enyart make one of his claims. At about 45 minutes in, Bob said:

The Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the last century. And the book of Isaiah, a lengthy book, is in its entirety in the Dead Sea Scrolls, dated from before Christ. And it is identical word for word, letter for letter, with the Hebrew book of Isaiah in Hebrew Bibles today.

I won’t dispute that evidence shows that the Isaiah text has been transmitted through the years quite accurately. But unless several sources that I found were uniformly wrong, to stretch it to “word for word and letter for letter” accuracy is just plain a lie.

In biblical studies I did years ago several good Christian biblical scholars made the point that almost none of the ancient texts reach the standard that Enyart claims here. Can Enyart tell the world of biblical scholarship just which of the variants of OT manuscripts is the word and letter perfect one?

 

[Bob Enyart]

Phy's right again...

Phy's right again...

I've just emailed our KGOVArchives webmaster and asked him to post this at the top of the Show Summary:

* Error correction: In this show, I (Bob Enyart) wrongly exaggerated the similarity between the Dead Sea Scrolls book of Isaiah, and the modern Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible. While the ancient Isaiah text is exact to our modern Hebrew Bibles in over 95% of the text, and in less than 5% there are primarily minor spelling and stylistic alterations. I incorrectly stated that, “The Dead Sea Scrolls… book of Isaiah… is identical word for word, letter for letter, with the Hebrew book of Isaiah in Hebrew Bibles today.” This is flatly incorrect. I am thankful for the correction from ThePhy at TheologyOnline.com. Making such mistakes do not help the credibility of the program, and I am happy to provide corrections. It has been more than twenty years since I’ve done my reading on the text of the manuscripts issues of the Old and New Testaments, and as my memory faded, I distorted my recollection in favor of my worldview. If I would have heard another talk show host make the same exaggerated claim, I think I would have challenged it, googled the matter, and instantly proved it wrong. So, I apologize for making that error.

Hey Phy, if you move to Denver, you could join my staff and correct these errors before I make them on the air! Now, wouldn't that be an improvement that both sides would enjoy? The last thing I want is for my audience to pick up claims from me that are easily (without dispute!) disproved (of course, you would claim that for much of what I say, but much of that we would dispute). Really, thanks again. -Bob

p.s., I've printed out the 23 pages of your old thread criticizing me for pointing out that Venus is spinning backwards - in violation of the conservation of angular momentum (if the solar system was formed naturally out of a condensing spinning nebula). I'll read it on our vacation and I hope to reply when I return and from our new office (we're moving our studio), in about a month from now. Thx for that thread also! We'll see if it merits another apology. (I SURE HOPE NOT!) -Bob

 

[CRASH]

I'm sorry Turbo, you must have thought I was talking to you.

I wasn't. I was talking to the whiny hypocrite.

No need to apologize.

Hypocrite? Aren't you the one pretending to be a Christian, but hanging out at gay web sites agreeing that Paul might really be gay? The nerve of some people.

 

[ThePhy]

Hey Phy, if you move to Denver, you could join my staff and correct these errors before I make them on the air! Now, wouldn't that be an improvement that both sides would enjoy? The last thing I want is for my audience to pick up claims from me that are easily (without dispute!) disproved (of course, you would claim that for much of what I say, but much of that we would dispute). Really, thanks again. -Bob

You’re on. I’ll gen up enough scripts to keep your air time full for a few months. We’ll start with things like moon dust, thermodynamics, HDF, and Jupiter’s moon Io. Then we can take a couple months exposing AIG and the ICR. To maintain long-term credibility, we’ll continue the Science Friday series every time the CSRQ comes out, but from now on it will be to show why it is a few steps lower than pulp fiction. At last the truth outs.