Comments on: How Would You Rate the Speakers? http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/ Atheism with Positivity Mon, 23 Nov 2009 06:19:54 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Darryl http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-27016 Darryl Sat, 12 May 2007 06:28:58 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-27016 These kind of debates do little for either side. Arguing something as abstract as whether or not God exists does not require handling facts, and facts are the dividing line: the only facts believers have are their subjective experiences; the only facts that non-believers care about are objective (unless you're a brain researcher or student of religions or some such thing). So long as the measure of factuality is different for these two parties, nothing gets resolved. I do not for a moment doubt the experiences of Christians; only their awareness. As one who once had similar experiences that were 'real' to me, I sympathize. But, their experiences do not change my reality, nor the laws of physics in the universe. If they would understand that their experiences are private, as are those of believers in every religion that involves altered mental states, they would not be militant, and they would not be trying to convince me and the rest of the world of the 'Truth' of their beliefs. These kind of debates do little for either side. Arguing something as abstract as whether or not God exists does not require handling facts, and facts are the dividing line: the only facts believers have are their subjective experiences; the only facts that non-believers care about are objective (unless you’re a brain researcher or student of religions or some such thing). So long as the measure of factuality is different for these two parties, nothing gets resolved. I do not for a moment doubt the experiences of Christians; only their awareness. As one who once had similar experiences that were ‘real’ to me, I sympathize. But, their experiences do not change my reality, nor the laws of physics in the universe. If they would understand that their experiences are private, as are those of believers in every religion that involves altered mental states, they would not be militant, and they would not be trying to convince me and the rest of the world of the ‘Truth’ of their beliefs.

]]> By: Logos http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26995 Logos Sat, 12 May 2007 04:44:34 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26995 I think you hit the nail on the head! I think you hit the nail on the head!

]]> By: Mike C http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26992 Mike C Sat, 12 May 2007 04:41:01 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26992 I finally got around to watching it, and it was definitely as bad as everyone was saying it was. At least from the minimal clips that ABC chose to show I didn’t hear either side say anything intelligent the whole time. Brian and Kelly were rude, Cameron & Comfort were polite but condescending. I doubt that anyone was impressed by either sides’ arguments unless you were already inclined to agree with them. And it’s pure self-promotion for either of them to declare themselves the “winner”. They were all losers IMO. I finally got around to watching it, and it was definitely as bad as everyone was saying it was. At least from the minimal clips that ABC chose to show I didn’t hear either side say anything intelligent the whole time. Brian and Kelly were rude, Cameron & Comfort were polite but condescending. I doubt that anyone was impressed by either sides’ arguments unless you were already inclined to agree with them. And it’s pure self-promotion for either of them to declare themselves the “winner”. They were all losers IMO.

]]> By: valmorian http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26828 valmorian Fri, 11 May 2007 15:48:40 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26828 Brian and Kelly gaffed with respect to the morality question. The proper answer to "isn't morality subjective if not grounded in God?" is to bring up Euthyphro's Dilemma, which outlines very clearly that either morality is objective without respect to God, or it is subjective then, too. Brian and Kelly gaffed with respect to the morality question. The proper answer to “isn’t morality subjective if not grounded in God?” is to bring up Euthyphro’s Dilemma, which outlines very clearly that either morality is objective without respect to God, or it is subjective then, too.

]]> By: Bart Dorsey http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26793 Bart Dorsey Fri, 11 May 2007 14:02:21 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26793 I uploaded the debate as it aired on TV so people can see how it was cut up. Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JfFeYNVVB8 Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaOFyIMF37g I uploaded the debate as it aired on TV so people can see how it was cut up.

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JfFeYNVVB8

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaOFyIMF37g

]]> By: HappyNat http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26785 HappyNat Fri, 11 May 2007 12:48:03 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26785 Oh, Frank . . . I thought I was done with you. But you pop up again . . .it is a small internets. Oh, Frank . . . I thought I was done with you. But you pop up again . . .it is a small internets.

]]> By: eli sarver http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26779 eli sarver Fri, 11 May 2007 11:32:30 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26779 I noticed Brian and Kelly taking notes during the debate, but Kirk and Ray didn't appear to be writing things down. The whole transitional fossil bit was gimmicky and Kirk brought the subject up on his own. Brian's "what a numb-nut" didn't help, even if I agree with him. I thought that Ray and Kirk were more inclined to 'stick to the script' and Brian and Kelly were more inclined to have a discussion or at least raise an argument. I noticed Brian and Kelly taking notes during the debate, but Kirk and Ray didn’t appear to be writing things down. The whole transitional fossil bit was gimmicky and Kirk brought the subject up on his own. Brian’s “what a numb-nut” didn’t help, even if I agree with him.

I thought that Ray and Kirk were more inclined to ’stick to the script’ and Brian and Kelly were more inclined to have a discussion or at least raise an argument.

]]> By: James W. http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26747 James W. Fri, 11 May 2007 08:07:13 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26747 This is called "being prepared". As you remember, Kirk magically brought with him "transitional fossils" as "previously prepared by our graphic designer". This means he too had prior knowledge of what was going to be discussed. Did you see the notebooks that <em>both</em> sides had with them during the debate? It was full of their own notes, points, and speeches as previously prepared. This means that <em>both</em> sides knew what the other side was going to discuss. Your highly biased view that this is despicable is quite laughable inasmuch as almost every single debater does the exact same thing, Comfort and Cameron included. Honestly, all the name calling about this is coming from the Christian side of things, that doesn't do much for credibility. It seems Michael Stradley wants to spend more time calling Brian names than trying to promote good Christian values and seems to think there is nothing wrong with this. <blockquote> Matthew 19:19 19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, <em>Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.</em> </blockquote> Either Michael is breaking a long standing tenet -- and commandment of God -- or he hates himself as well. I believe Ray would call this "blaspheming in the name of God". This is called “being prepared”. As you remember, Kirk magically brought with him “transitional fossils” as “previously prepared by our graphic designer”. This means he too had prior knowledge of what was going to be discussed.

Did you see the notebooks that both sides had with them during the debate? It was full of their own notes, points, and speeches as previously prepared. This means that both sides knew what the other side was going to discuss.

Your highly biased view that this is despicable is quite laughable inasmuch as almost every single debater does the exact same thing, Comfort and Cameron included.

Honestly, all the name calling about this is coming from the Christian side of things, that doesn’t do much for credibility. It seems Michael Stradley wants to spend more time calling Brian names than trying to promote good Christian values and seems to think there is nothing wrong with this.

Matthew 19:19
19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Either Michael is breaking a long standing tenet — and commandment of God — or he hates himself as well. I believe Ray would call this “blaspheming in the name of God”.

]]> By: Frank Walton http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26731 Frank Walton Fri, 11 May 2007 06:12:22 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26731 Brian Sapient and Kelly are full of it. Their tactics are despicable. <a href="http://atheismsucks.blogspot.com/2007/05/shocker-brian-sapient-and-kelly-caught.html" rel="nofollow">Read this</a> to know what I mean. Brian Sapient and Kelly are full of it. Their tactics are despicable. Read this to know what I mean.

]]> By: Robin http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/comment-page-1/#comment-26711 Robin Fri, 11 May 2007 04:35:17 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/10/how-would-you-rate-the-speakers/#comment-26711 Yes it was her nervousness and Brians frustration...that basically did them in, in the overall presentation. But hands down they won in the overall reasonable, rational, not to mention factual information category. jmho. Yes it was her nervousness and Brians frustration…that basically did them in, in the overall presentation. But hands down they won in the overall reasonable, rational, not to mention factual information category. jmho.

]]>