if you don't know who Nathan Thompson is, he's a very annoying flerf who got arrested for harassing children. as for GMan. you should know by now. he's very infamous in the atheist community. they both got recked in this debate.

Pretty sure this subject is already here about 4 threads down my list.

Two things before I consider pressing the "play" button... What is a "flerf" and is "recked" like this:

reck
/rɛk/
Learn to pronounce
verb ARCHAIC
past tense: recked; past participle: recked
pay heed to something.
"ye reck not of lands or goods"
it is of importance.
"what recks it?"

?

I haven't started my consideration on whether I will press the "play" button, yet...

Oh, now I have both started and finished my consideration and my decision is to not press "play".

I would also include this debate between PZ and the Discovery Institute about whale evolution and other things:

I'd watch this except I have a DIY root canal scheduled for this afternoon.

You mean that watching that tripe would be as painful as a DIY root canal?

Someone doesn’t understand chronological sorting, cladistics or genetics. That, or they pretend to know just enough to raise “questions”. Take note that the anti evolution rant never makes any statements, but rather rolls out the tired old tactic of attack on a superficial level without ever taking a hard stand.

RS

Svartalf wrote:You mean that watching that tripe would be as painful as a DIY root canal?

Probably worse.

That response video is hilariously inept.

theropod_V_2.0 wrote:Someone doesn’t understand chronological sorting, cladistics or genetics. That, or they pretend to know just enough to raise “questions”. Take note that the anti evolution rant never makes any statements, but rather rolls out the tired old tactic of attack on a superficial level without ever taking a hard stand.

RS

"but Coyne in his book says..." Yes, Coyne uses colloquial language to make the model a little easier to understand and rather than take the colloquial explanation and look at the science at its foundation, DI would rather derive their own scientific reading from the colloquial explanation for the layperson and misrepresent the science he is trying to explain.

Gee, does THAT sound like anyone we know?