Dawkins says he won’t debate William Lane Craig because his only claim to fame is that he’s a professional debater – and he says that people he debates have “got to have something more than that”. Dawkins says “I’m Busy”.
Figures. Libs really do not like to debate folks who can debate back. However, it’s amazing that he wouldn’t try and stand up to someone defending an untestable hypothesis.
(Yup, it is untestable. And yup, I’m still a Christian.)
If you don’t mind, please ping me to your posts so we don’t duplicate, and so I can ping the list :o)
Ping!
Because Richard Dawkins is a spineless pansy who knows that once he gets outside his circle of acquaintances and acolytes, any real debating opposition would stomp him flat.
“Never wrestle with a pig. You’ll just get dirty and only the pig will enjoy it”
Evidently he is more than just a master debater.
When I get the time I will begin with the articles referenced at Encyclopedia Of Philosophy and follow the links where they lead.
I imagine it will lead to hours of philosophical enlightenment.
Then again I could spend more time dragging my eyes through these so-called "Philosophy" threads on FR and gaining nothing more than heightened frustration and lowered expectations with regard to the average Freepers ability to engage in philosophical discussion.