[irrelig]So, apparently the debate has been continuing on the Evidence 4 Faith show without us. In this episode, we take the time to carefully but respectfully respond to the recent E4F segments that continue to analyze what they should have said but didn’t while the debate was actually happening.
It’s really all about respect, you know.
39 Responses to “93: E4F Debate Analysis Analysis”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- Epsilon Clue » Blog Archive » Beneficial Mutations: a Reductio ad Absurdum - [...] (Hat tip to the skunk-dicks at Irreligiosophy.) [...]
Boo-ya! This is the one we all were waiting for!
Honestly, I always assumed that this podcast distorts the truth when talking about other podcasts for entertainment purposes, and being ridiculed by them doesn’t necessarily mean that your a bad podcast. But in this case I can’t find any excuses or even satisfactory explanations for the sheer stupidity E4F displayed in some of the instances C&L showed – my belief in human intelligence has just received a detrimental blow…
(The Wiggly and Way (if you spell it like this) at least did not claim or even believe they were talking about science)
Good show. Nice to see the E4F guys are doing some great science, plugging steaks into electrical outlets and taking long walks on the beach. Which reminds me–you know what would come back more ordered from a long day in the sun? A plant! Probably algae too or something like that. Algae are plants, right?
Also, one of these days you guys should do an episode entirely composed of audio Chuck has left out to see if Leighton listens to the show. I suspect it would be a long, long podcast.
You can’t see me but I’m doing the flailing Kermit arms.
And… ALL HAIL PAKHDI!
I’d love to see all those hundreds of personal emails.
Because I am a crazed loon with no sense of privacy.
I’m addicted. I listen to at least one podcast a night, if not two. As an exmo, I love the mormon episodes, I think those are the best you’ve ever done, but I’m a bit biased.
Please don’t tell me that you didn’t make a Pahkdi meat puppet to fool Leighton with.
You know what pissed me off?
Suppose God exists. Why then would there even be detrimental mutations in the first place?
THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
I got this one: “Because of the fall.” So we have things like cystic fibrosis and Huntington’s Disease because our great great great great grandmother chowed down on an apple.
It necessarily follows, then, that God is a dick.
@ Gliblord: I stopped worshipping God for less fatal diseases
I’m going for a walk, with the dogs, on a beach, today. There isn’t much sun so maybe the hounds will devolve in to cristian apologists.
Let’s see…
– Phil Plait says: “Don’t be a Dick”.
– God is a Dick.
– Therefore God doesn’t exist.
After listening to E4F’s “scientific” arguments, the above abuse of reasoning shines like a crystal clear diamond in comparison.
I know some people don’t “get” science (probably because of the way it makes their brains hurt to hold more than one concept at a time), but seriously… my son could have explained the 2nd law at age 5 since MC Hawking’s “Entropy” was his favorite after Billy Idol’s “White Wedding”.
[Now he is almost 11 and argues with me about the Copenhagen interpretation of the double slit experiment… sigh]
On the other hand, we probably neglected some of his religious indoctrination, because when we were listening to “Good Omens” [Gaiman and Pratchett] as an audio book, he asked “Who was Adam and Eve?”.
The look of “Pappa, that’s bullshit!” on his face when I tried to explain to him that some people believe God created Adam and Eve, and they think all humans descend from them. It was like trying to convince a jaded teenager that Santa actually exists.
Quite funny at the time, but now I try to insert a little bit of religious history here and there so he at least gets the cultural references.
[…powercord into a steak… sigh…]
I really enjoyed watching The Nature of Existence after listening to your podcast with the director. The thing I realized is that religion, or God, is a deeply personal thing, and that everyone approaches the issue differently. When a person says that their particular belief makes them happy, and it makes them want to be a better person, and in so far as it actually DOES make them a better person (and not a homophobic apocalyptic nut job, then that is the best argument for belief. You can say that there are better reasons to be good, and there are, but ultimately if a person is driven to contribute to society and be an all around decent human, then I can be tolerant of whatever belief system they hold (at this point the debate would center around basic ethics and whether or not the god or belief system a given individual holds is actually good for society, or harmful).
So it strikes me as strange that believers would even try to tread in scientific or “proof based” waters. If the value something holds is purely personal and metaphysical, what is the point of trying to make it fit with science? It’s like trying to argue that, because of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, Mozart composed classical music. Not only is the argument nonsensical, it also detracts from the more important discussion of whether or not Mozart is useful in our daily lives.
Obviously my Mozart analogy isn’t 100% spot on, but you get the idea.
Game over. They lied and put words in your mouth about sickle cell anemia and then even in their own mouths about beneficial mutations.Catching someone in a lie is about the best way to win a debate. Therefore, checkmate.
But they’re still better than you since they don’t cuss.
If they ever come on your show, ask them when they are going to stop criminally breaking the laws of thermodynamics, as they say life does. I guess they wouldn’t be called scientific laws if they weren’t meant to be broken?
Way to break character atheist dumbasses, now we know Leighton doesn’t only do his research on Wikipedia. If atheists will lie about that… WHAT ELSE ARE THEY NOT TELLING US?
TELL US THE TRUTH, LEIGHTON!
Were you the gunman on the grassy knoll?
Are you a reptiloid?
Have you at any time taken money from the following groups: OPEC, AMA, NAMBLA, NRA?
Are you not, in fact, a secret asian woman?
@all the Leighton questioners- Don’t you know he’s one of the sons of God who were intimate with the daughters of men? I mean c’mon!
i’m born again , I walked the dogs and there still dogs. QED Christ is my savior.
@Evidense4F8h
1: Evidence is spelled with a ‘c,’ not an ‘s.’ But this works if you were alluding to “dense” rather than “evidence.”
2. LOL. Oh noes! It’s a conspiracy! Don’t tell them ANYTHING! Even if they tie you down and torture you, tickling your armpits with feathers and dripping water on your heads. The Christians MUST NOT KNOW THE SECRET. IF THIS GETS OUT THEN SATAN WON’T BE ABLE TO REIGN AS OUR KING. HOLY SHIT! Emergency meeting, guys, we need to change the Atheist Pass Code for security reasons. Everyone remember the handshake? You know the place, 1900 this Tuesday, don’t be late. We’ve got us some conspirin’ to do!
Let’s use Star Wars to put this into perspective. Leighton and Chuck are Jedi. They walk into a Mos Eisley bar to have a relatively normal conversation. But what do they get? Two fucking aliens wanting to pick a fight. This podcast just cut their arms off.
@ Dietrich: The correct term fior that species of extra-terrestrial is “Reptilian”.
This episode made me laugh out loud but cry inside. I just can’t believe the E4F guys’ lack of understanding of science, and, their lack of interest in improving it.
Gotta go and plug my meat in for dinner.
Ouch. There have to be smarter Christian apologists than those guys. Maybe you could get Michael Behe on the podcast? But then, even he doesn’t deny evolution (as I understand it, he only claims that it must have some some kind of assistance–i.e. God).
Dr. Mike has less biological knowledge than Dr. Dre. Who gave him his degree? Can you call some medical bureau to recall his license based on the amount of lies and non sense he preaches/believes? Imagine how it is for his patients, either pray or plug yourself into the electrical system and hope for the 2nd law of thermodynamics to get rid of your malaria and sickle cell anemia. And how great it is to call serious conditions with fun names when you are a doctor, uh? Patients love it!
Thanks for doing this update podcast on the E4F “situation”. I agree, any further episodes you do with them would only serve their lack of show content for a few months. The follow-up they did right after the “debate” was galling for its level of dishonesty. I thought the clip you played of them referencing ICR for their info in this last podcast was basically the dead-to-rights nail-in-coffin evidence that they A) have no idea what they’re talking about in the first place; B) weren’t prepared for you two – AT ALL; C) think that Googling for the first apologetics they can find is considered real “research”; and D) had no compunction whatsoever about checking said apologetics against any counter-apologetics.
These guys are just like all the others: They regurgitate baseless talking points that are easily countered, and don’t even understand what undergirds their positions or the defenses. C&L: 1000, E4F: 0.
ironlungz, my thoughts exactly.I listened to the podcast on the plane about four hours ago and I still seethe with anger. If Dr Mike Lourakis* has a licence to practice medicine, i should be offered the position of Head of the Medical Faculty in Stanford the minute I set foot on US soil.
*then again, the name sounds like he’s from Crete, which would explain a lot of things.
Is that E4F Dr. Mike a real medical doctor? My faith in the American medical care system is badly shaken. Please reassure me and tell me you researched him, and discovered that he doesn’t actually have a license to practice medicine.
OMG, only 3.5 hours until Tuesday and another podcast! So excited…
Love you guys, Chuck & Leighton. Keep up the good work!
@(was) somewhere in greece , yeah Dr Mike is complete malaka 🙂 Musaka, tatziki, kiftedes, shish kebap oh man I am calling the greek restaurant because of you now.
You have to love the second law of thermodynamics argument. It has nothing to do with evolution.
In fact if it was a valid argument it would mean life itself is not possible.
@Stephan: “If the value (religious belief) holds is purely personal and metaphysical, what is the point of trying to make it fit with science”….the problem is, these people DON’T see their faith as a purely personal and metaphysical thing. They need to try to prove the basis of their faith in the language of the world (even though, they’re not supposed to be “of the world” right?) because they can’t handle the idea that their god might not exist outside their own heads. So while their faith is supposed to exist independent of scientific proof, some part of them obviously feels the discord between being rational and being faithful. Deep down these guys know that if what they believe is true, it’s always true. There’s no reason why the god that created the universe can’t be seen when observing his universe – unless he didn’t create it to begin with. So, you pretty much have to make shit up and ignore truth in order to keep believing.
I would love/hate to hear another debate between you guys and the E4F boys. I would only accept this debate if it were held on your terms (that is, no punches pulled) and only if you crushed their non-existent souls. No soul crushing, no go.
oh, and one more thing: Episodes like this one are pure gold. It’s great to have more take-downs of whackjobs available to listen to. And Irreligiosophy take-downs are exceptionally sweet. I’d ask you to do more like this episode, but then I’d feel like I’d have to pay you, and then where would our relationship be?
If you are looking for some comedy gold listen to Evidence 4 faith podcast called “Why our kids leave the Church.”
Sample: They point out that when kids learn that science says the earth is really old, that brings about doubt about the truth of the bible. Solution: Either show how the earth isn’t really old OR show how the earth being old can be reconciled with the bible. They don’t care which one you choose.
What a great podcast, should have been longer!
I’m apparently not the only one who has trouble believing Dr. Mike is a licensed MD. When he needs to research the latest medical developments, does he go to the Institute for Creation Research site? When he prescribes medications, does he trust the scientists who determined the proper med and dosage, knowing that they’ve completely missed the boat on this evolution thing? When he needs to use deductive reasoning and sound scientific knowledge to diagnose a patient, does the mental process involve plugging meat into a wall socket? Chuck, perhaps you would know: Where would someone go to look into a doctor’s credentials?
Hell yes! And Chuck: Make sure that you introduce yourself as !!DOCTOR!! Morrison as a obvious and tacky appeal to authority!! That is always a nice touch.
Loved it when you pointed out there mis-use and mis-understanding of the 2nd law quote!
This podcast really revealed you guys as a bunch of liars. Unless you’ve got Kim Jong Il’s grandson, there is no such thing as a fat North Korean child. Learn how to use the google, that’s like saying you’ve got an obese Ethiopian living with you. Give me a break.