For discussion.

Side note: my "theist-lying-and-spreading-misconceptions-about-science"-Meter went off in the first minute, at he Cardinal's opening speech. Or others might call it Bullshit-Meter.

http://www.mq.edu.au/mqvideos/pell_barker.html

Pell is an idiot. Evidence here: http://www.theage.com.au/national/pell- ... -l8fy.html

Crocodile Gandhi wrote:Pell is an idiot. Evidence here: http://www.theage.com.au/national/pell- ... -l8fy.html

Indeed. This was the first I've heard from the guy, and in the first minute his intellectual dishonesty was apparent.

Dan Barker isn't so great either. In a previous debate, he objected to his own work being quoted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ-NBFFMm90

Nocterro wrote:Dan Barker isn't so great either. In a previous debate, he objected to his own work being quoted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ-NBFFMm90

I haven't really seen anything from Barker. It doesn't invalidate Pell being an idiot.

Will check this out later.

Wow. I was embarrassed for Pell. He's just shown what an amatuer he is at debating.

I have read Barkers book ''godless''. Actually it's quite good. It has a forward from Richard Dawkins.

What can one say about Pell that hasn't already been said here. The man is delusional or a fraud. He cannot be anything else.
And this is the man who knew about sexual abuse of children but considered the church to be more important than the lives of the little Innocent children, so he chose to hush it up.

'Chance' canard straight out of the gate. Case dismissed.

Nocterro wrote:Dan Barker isn't so great either. In a previous debate, he objected to his own work being quoted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ-NBFFMm90

Oh?

Dan Barker was a devout believer for a large portion of his life, decades, like many atheists today. He is, in my opinion the most credible (formal) debater, since he understands what's it like to sincerely believe in that non-sense and live his life by it everyday and even teach it ...etc.

And a pest like Pell, who sincerely believes prayer can cure cancer, and who, right in the first minute of his "argument", is already misrepresenting atheism cannot hope to make one sound argument against someone like Barker. Pell has started off by lying straight away of what atheism represents and how science works. Someone should introduce him also to Richard Dawkins' 1-7 scale. On which any self-respecting atheist (a few don't, most are) will put themselves on number 6.

Guess where they majority of theists would themselves belong. On no.1. The arrogant certitude being the hallmark of their religion. Yes, there are plenty exceptions, but it doesn't change who is really quite often the dishonest and 100% of their belief. It's in their "argument".

They can't give a plausible explanation of how they are certain, that the omnipotent and omniscient being with "maximal excellence" whose existence they're postulating even exists. For example, their Ontological argument, with its circular logic, is just one of their pathetic attempts at trying to make a case.

Some like Deepa Chopra [spel] are saying that we don't know what happened at a billionth of a second before the Big Bang. There he exclaims is god. Science can't explain that infinitesimal time period so there must be a god. They argue with scientific sounding words that pulls in the gullible. That Guru [who I forgot how to spell his name] has sold millions of books on mambo jumbo.
Barker had Pell speechless to a point where he made a complete ass of himself, as most theists get when debating someone who knows what they're talking about. All they are able to quote is their blind faith, nothing else can stand up to the scientific scrutiny of their words salad.

angelo wrote:Some like Deepa Chopra [spel] are saying that we don't know what happened at a billionth of a second before the Big Bang. There he exclaims is god. Science can't explain that infinitesimal time period so there must be a god. They argue with scientific sounding words that pulls in the gullible. That Guru [who I forgot how to spell his name] has sold millions of books on mambo jumbo.
Barker had Pell speechless to a point where he made a complete ass of himself, as most theists get when debating someone who knows what they're talking about. All they are able to quote is their blind faith, nothing else can stand up to the scientific scrutiny of their words salad.

Ah, Thanks for mentioning Chopra, since this thread isn't about him I will open a new one, I want to share something I've noticed after watching Sam Harris' recent debate with that arrogant pest. It's not just about Chopra, but all debaters I've seen so far.

Yes, I also watched that debate on the ABC last night.