Ray gets a thousand more sales out of me

Ray posted today about me calling him a willful liar. And thus will get lots of sales today. A pitty that he saw the business opportunity. Here my answer to his post:

Then Ray, for the Bible to be inerrant we should not find a single typo in any of them?

Also, do not misrepresent my writing, for some fossil-documented "species-to-species transitions" we have hundreds of fossils, for others we have tens. Why do you do this? Why did you have to change my meaning? Of course: willful liar.

There are several hominid fossils that demonstrate "transitions" between our common ancestor with chimps and ourselves, and you dismissed the whole thing because of a few fakes, and the lie that one fossil was a person with arthritis (willful liar). So, in the case of our evolution from ancestral apes (we are still apes), we do not have thousands, we have tens. So, does that invalidate evolution? Of course not. But you never mention these fossils, do you? Conclusion: willful liar.

Of course orangutans are our very distant relatives, but that does not qualify them to fly in the plane with us. Should now I assume that God does not exist because mentally challenged people would not behave either, then God does not exist because the mentally challenged should be the image of God, and thus be all right? Or else is God mentally challenged too?

Now where you said I spoke to lay folks about the theory and each sounded like an expert at first. Come on! These TEENS sounded like experts first? You are not only a willful liar but a bad one at that. I might believe that the UCLA profs did not want to appear in your mockumentary, but not that those you present in the video sounded like experts first. You have to be kidding me.

Your video does not debunk evolution, it debunks strawmen of evolution. This is what your customers will never understand. Sad but true. Keep the lies coming Ray. It works for you all right.

Anybody buying your special will be buying a bunch of lies and misinformation. I can do nothing about it, so be it.

G.E.

Arguing Fallacies With Fallacies

Like I said, I'm still catching up. I thought this was humorous from a previous post regarding Brian that no one seemed to catch. When an atheist comments on fallacious logic, Brian responds, in part:

I do agree defenition of a straw man but not all christians argue circular and just as many atheists do it as well so your point is void

He responds to a charge of using circular and straw man fallacies by arguing a tu quoque fallacy. Classic.

Dan the Debunker Disproves Evolution

I said I wouldn't go back to Debunking Atheists as Dan has decided to delete all of my comments because "it's his blog" and he can do what he wants. Jeff the Fish, though, posts Hilarious Creationist Quotes from my old friend, luring me back:

If science and nature is truth and evolution is the opposite then evolution is a fraud or a lie. I rest my case.

Had I seen it sooner, perhaps it would have made my begging the question post.

New Raytractors Project: DisComforting Logic

I was thinking of a new Raytractors project for us, in addition to some of the ones proposed in the past. This stems from the new Atheist Starter Kit on the right of his blog and some of the discussion here about it.

How about we publish a series of blog posts entitled DisComforting Logic where we do a short educational blurb about some logical fallacy and give some statement or argument of Ray's as an example?

I decided to give an example of what I was thinking with a post on the false analogy in my blog. These posts would state the fallacy, the type, the definition, Ray's argument, a summary of why it is a fallacy, and demonstrate a fallacy that is similar. Off the top of my head, I can think of the following that he uses:

Ad hominem
Ad ignorantiam
Appeal to authority
Bare assertion
Begging the question (circular logic)
False dilemma
False premise
Loaded question
No true Scotsman
Non sequitir
Proof by assertion/argumentum ad nauseam
And....... STRAW MAN :-)


Remember, it's any statement/argument of Ray's from his blog, tracts, shows, etc. Thoughts?