The dynamic duo at their finest.
Posted by Jeff on February 22, 2009
You know, every time I hear either Ray Comfort or Kirk Cameron spewing their feeble strawman arguments I die a little inside. They apparently have a website now that is dedicated to debunking those ‘angry atheists’ and nothing else. The things on this site are amazing to say the least. Their articles are full of logical fallacies (behold the No True Scotsman fallacy) and a total misunderstanding of science. You would think that grown men could refine their ridiculously childish points considering the fact that atheists and scientists have been confronting them for years over the fallacious nature of their every premise regarding science and non-belief. But no, they still argue like a couple of 2nd graders who just didn’t grasp what that Nova doc they watched was actually saying. Their every word is a rebuttal to a caricature of science and a non-existent atheist straw man. It’s actually quite painful to watch, as you can see:
If you are still capable of sentient functioning after that mind-numbing disaster, check out this little gem, where junior bonehead Kirk interviews an ‘atheist’ on the street. If that girl is a real random atheist they just happened to meet and not just some bad actress then I’m Neil Armstrong and will give you a really good price on some moon rocks.
You know, it really doesn’t matter to most of us non-believers what you believe. But people like Cameron and Comfort are the reason why we get so irritated sometimes. It seems like so many religious apologists are needlessly aggressive in their proselytizing and do the intellectual equivalence of plugging their ears and yelling ‘La la la la la’ whenever someone points out inconsistencies or inaccuracies in their argument. Prime example is the whole ‘something from nothing’ argument. Saying everything comes from something is great, but what they don’t realize is that there is no reason to apply that logic to the universe and then proclaim God as the exception. That’s not even to mention that the whole argument hinges on a total misunderstanding of what evolution even is.
Sorry guys, but if these are the most compelling arguments you have I’m not going to lose much sleep at night. If you can come up with a sophisticated argument that takes into account accurate depictions of what we actually know about the world instead of these silly cartoonish notions of evolution and the Big Bang you cling to, then maybe I’d listen.