"For frak's sake, what's the point?" That's all the reaction I can muster to the news we've been getting from a jillion folks via email, to the effect that Ray Comfort, The World's Stupidest Christian™, has agreed to debate noted science YouTuber thunderf00t. No disrespect to thunderf00t, whose videos are among the best I've seen. But really, bud, talk about tilting at windmills.
That thunderf00t will clean Ray's clock is irrelevant, because Ray is the most egregiously dishonest person alive. What will happen will be the same thing that happened when Ray and his pal Kirk Cameron debated the Rational Response Squad on ABC some time back. Ray will make inane points, thunderf00t will decisively and unequivocally refute them, and then Ray will simply ignore everything thunderf00t said and repeat the limp arguments that were just blasted to smithereens by his opponent. Of course, Ray and Kirk looked like the dumbasses they are coming out of the RRS debate. The point is, they didn't, and couldn't, notice.
Ray, apart from being The World's Stupidest Christian™, is, more succinctly, a narcissist and a liar. And as he himself, perhaps ironically, has pointed out, the only reason he has any prominence at all is due to atheists. The unplumbed depths to which he allows his fractal wrongness to sink have been red meat to us, and a lot of us have bitten. But the net result of that has been to give Ray the validation he wants. If atheists are so fierce about attacking every moronic utterance Ray spews, then, obviously, that means he's got us scared and circling the wagons! Right? Uh-huh.
So, frankly, any "debate" with this supreme idiot will be a farcical waste of time, because Ray isn't interested in truth (as in the "verifiable, objective facts" definition of the term), just his own brand of fundagelical truthiness. And these little charades simply pump up his ego by reinforcing his ego-gratifying need to believe that the simple fact atheists want to take him on proves he's right. The content of the debate is irrelevant. That it's happening at all is, to him, victory.
So can we just forget this cretin already? He ought to be relegated to the obscurity he richly deserves. Let him end up evangelizing at one of those non-denominational congregations that meet in half-empty strip malls in the dodgy part of town. It's where he deserves to be.
I certainly appreciate your point, Martin. However, I think there is a catch-22 situation that we experience in dealing with apologists, similar to what scientists experience in dealing with creation "scientists." As you suggest, responding to their claims creates publicity for their cause, and perpetuates the illusion that their claims are strong enough to warrant a response. On the other hand, standing back and saying "This is too stupid to dignify with a response" creates the illusion that we're backing out of a fight, and that we're embarrassed to admit our opponents' arguments are impeccable.
ReplyDeleteTo be sure, I hope no one actually thinks Comfort's arguments are impeccable, but having read the comments on his blog, it's a little scary how many people support him. The fact that he has such a large following is what makes him difficult to ignore. As much as I see the validity in your point, I think a point can be made that we should reach out to people "on the fence," people who aren't logically inclined enough to see the stupidity of Comfort's points, but haven't been completely taken in by his charlatanism.
Just to clarify, tjonp: I wasn't suggesting atheists and scientists should stop debating anyone, ever. I'm just saying that we should ignore Ray Comfort. I have no problem with debates (well, not much, because I think they're usually just theater, and that they create the false impression in people's minds that real-world facts are actually determined by who wins debates), as long as there's an honest exchange of ideas taking place, between two people willing to tackle a topic on its intellectual merits. Ray isn't that kind of a debater. He's fundamentally dishonest and narcissistic. Not only does he not engage the topic of a debate openly and intellectually, he doesn't even listen to the other side. He shows up simply to rehash his infantile non-arguments, and then preach. And getting validation from atheists is a charge to his ego that he hasn't earned on merits.
ReplyDeleteYeah, sure, let's have healthy debates with worthy Christian opponents so that audiences can consider both sides, and be exposed to viewpoints they may not otherwise have heard. Ray Comfort is not a worthy opponent.
I don't have the quote in context, but I think that when Ray says he has prominence because of us, he means our very existence. Much as atheists only 'exist' because there are people making god claims, the only way for us to make Ray 'go away' would be to convert to Christianity or kill ourselves.
ReplyDeleteI'm of two minds about this.
ReplyDeleteCertainly, the main reason Dawkins refuses to formally debate cretins - to avoid giving a veneer of legitimacy & respectability to superstitious delusion - makes sense.
On the other hand, considering Thunderfoot's utter shaming of chumps like VenomfangX and whoever that new Posterboy for Creationist Stupidity is (and, of course, TF's grasp of science and ability to explain it), I look forward to an entertaining little spectacle. Usually, Ray has some kind of audience to play off (like with the RRS debate) or a home-ground advantage (likw his WOTM chucklefests with K-Cam). This time it sounds like it'll be on neutral ground.
However, considering how much creationists like to lie, cock around and shift the goalposts (Expelled & Dover to name but two examples), I wouldn't be surprised if there were some last-minute shenanigans from the Comfort camp.
But if goes ahead as planned and is just going to be a simple one-on-one, it's going to be interesting to hear exactly how Ray is going to avoid answering questions, evade rebuttals and generally tie himself up dodging the issues. Hope there's enough room for Ray's mental gymnastics and logic loops.
I know, I am ashamed to say I am addicted to that Raytard. It's a sickness.
ReplyDeleteI've been ignoring Ray for a long time. For quite awhile, I commented on his blog, but eventually he just ticked me off. He even quoted me in his stupid book and didn't think to credit me for the comment.
ReplyDeleteI think there's a possible way to deal with Ray in a public setting, and it requires a lot of research, some good cross-referencing, and maybe a Kindle for use during the debate.
ReplyDeleteRay Comfort has nothing new to say. He doesn't debate, he recites prefab non-arguments and scores points by sticking to his script and sounding like he believes it. Maybe you can throw him off by giving his points before he does, possibly in a funny accent, and refuting them BEFORE he presents them. Possibly the only thing you can do is knock the wind out of his sails before he even starts. Otherwise, you're going to be seen as on the defensive because he's not going to actually respond to anything you say. That allows him to control the discussion. If you can say everything he has to say BEFORE he says it, you might force him to address your criticism.
Or, you can pee on his shoes and fill his car with shaving cream. Either/or.
ray comfort, specifically, should be completely ignored.
ReplyDeletethe only reason he is heard -- at all -- by anyone -- is because people have been repeatedly pointing to his nonsense since that ridiculous banana video. ok, it was a bit of fun, for a limited time, but since then it's a weary repetition of inanity that gets no one anywhere.
ignore ray, and there's no reason to answer to ray. he'll dissipate.
For the same reason as anything happens on the interwebs:
ReplyDeleteFor the lulz.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI post at Ray's blog, affectionately known as The Swamp. I have gone back and forth on whether to post or not. I actually do know of a person on the fence who became an atheist because of Ray's blog. That makes me want to post there, but seeing my own words taken out of context makes me not want too.
ReplyDeleteI tend to agree with your frustration on this point. Ray Comfort is a joke even among Christian apologists. All debating him seems to accomplish is give him publicity. I can relate to the catch-22 to which tjonp refers, but it seems like there are more qualified people to debate.
ReplyDeleteI like the solution presented here in the Cectic webcomic.
ReplyDeleteIs making Ray Comfort the face of evangelism a bad thing?
ReplyDeleteSeriously, he's got like four arguments.
1) Pascal's wager
2) Atheist's believe nothing created everything.
3) Quote mine.
4) I don't understand science so it must not be true.
Like you said, he doesn't actually engage any counterarguments except to quote mine them. To anybody who's even paying a little attention it's obvious that he can't honestly defend his positions. Given a choice between that and a Gish gallup I know what I'd rather see in the spotlight. I can see Ray actually irritating people who want to believe or are on the fence enough to go do their own research instead of just thinking “Boy both sides sure have a lot of science sounding stuff on their side.”
If nothing else it’s useful to have some high profile folks out there defending intelligent design with the Bible.
Ray is indeed a waste of time and I agree that debating him in any public forum gives him publicity he really doesn't deserve however I find it incredibly entertaining to watch him dance around answers and pretend that he actually knows what he's talking about. Watching Ray get put in his place is always a good time.
ReplyDeleteAs I keep promising but not delivering on yet, Matt and I want to do a future show on Ray's lame-ass book, which we have now both read. Early in the book, Ray does the same backhanded compliment wherein he thanks atheists for giving him so much free publicity, which has allowed him to become a prominent figure in apologetics circles.
ReplyDeleteI gave this a lot of thought, and I have reached a conclusion similar to KarateMonkey's: "Good!"
I'm GLAD Ray Comfort is the public face of Christian arguments. His arguments suck. Anybody stupid enough to be drawn into them will try to use his arguments against any atheist with half a brain, and hopefully be smacked down thoroughly, decisively, and obviously. Arguments like the transcendental and ontological argument are a pain in the ass to counter, because they throw in so much pseudo-philosophical gobbledygook that it takes forever to explain the flaws, and still people won't fully understand what they're arguing except to the extent that it sounds sophisticated. Not so with, say, the banana argument or "You better hope you're not wrong." Those arguments are easy to grasp and trivial to debunk. Not just debunk, but loudly make fun of.
So Ray makes more money. Good for him. Go Ray. I'd rather see Ray Comfort have the money and resources to spread his dumbfuckery far and wide, than have that money go to somebody who is able to sound like they know what they are talking about.
LOL, Paul! That webcomic was perfect and would set the right tone for a "debate" against Comfort. Heh.
ReplyDeleteMartin. You have encouraged me to stop following his blog.
ReplyDeleteI can't guarantee i'll never post there again, but I am sick of the continuously repeated arguments that have been discussed and refuted ad nauseum.
Thanks.
I've been ignoring Ray for some time now, and only really caught wind of this via Thunderf00t. It helps that no one I know of is dumb enough to use his arguments. He's already irrelevant where I live.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm a little disappointed about the format. While I can appreciate the advantages for a two men, one camera approach (particularly the "force Ray Comfort to address one person instead of deliver a sermon" aspect), it precludes any scientific statements, since there's no way to verify or falsify claims made by either side during the discussion. This renders it particularly vulnerable to the Gish Gallop, although it also leaves it open for a dissection in video form.
I would have much rather preferred Comfort notice a different challenge, which was specified to be online to allow both sides time and resources to verify or attack each other's points. ...And okay, it would probably have been more lulz-worthy, given the speaker involved.
This video by Ray Comfort seems to be related.
ReplyDeleteIt's about the debate with Dawkins, Ray being given a platform by atheists and his banana.
The script is utterly retarded and for the most part makes barely sense. It's also full of self-promotion and quote mines.
Furthermore, it seems like he still doesn't get why everyone was laughing about him and his banana (and no, I'm not talking about the innuendo :P).
Now, he switched position. Can you teach an old dog new tricks? Nah, not really. He now claims that mankind was bestowed by God with the knowledge to breed bananas, dogs so that they fit into cars -- oh, and cats so that they are fit for his wife (whatever that means)... and all that is proof for an intelligent designer.
I was done paying attention to him after the whole banana thing.
ReplyDeleteI feel the pain of all the atheists here who want to throw their hands in the air about some of these people.
ReplyDeleteI'm maverik713 and thanks to AE and a few awesome youtubers, I've gotten lots of support from the atheist community. I hadn't officially planned to make any more videos until I saw the reaction and all the positive support. That being said, some of the videos I have to go through suck balls. Not only do I have to hear shitty arguments, I have to replay them dozens of times at certain points to break down the shitforbrainsian language of creationism. I still feel compelled to do it because we need to fight back, as petty as it may seem some times.
As for Ray, my hope is that we can have some really thorough documentation of how Ray operates. The RRS didn't really realize what they were up against. Tf00t knows Ray and the tactics of his ilk all too well. Venom was a Ray Comfort Foot Soldier, and now Tf00t has a shot at Master Shredder.
If I could spare the time, I'd go to Cali to get a front row seat to this one.
I side with Russell's well expressed argument. There are very few believers who come to Ray's blog and turn out to be a little more intelligent and actually interested in truth. Looking back, these are the people who started posting there, were engaged by rationalists, and after some days or weeks of back and forth left with more knowledge and far more critical of Ray's brand of beliefs. They are the minority, but once you know who the prechers and the actually insane people are and ignore them, there are people who can be reached. Ray himself deserves ridicule at most (which proves the Bible is right as we've all heard a million times). He can't really get success out of meeting Tfoot, except for purporting the impression that he, the White Knight, was interested in the atheist's wellbeing. But Tfoot reaches many more people, and we'll hopefully have a complete video compendium of all of Ray's tricks soundly demolished to his face. If people can really see that he looks even worse when he responds to an informed atheist than when avoiding meaningful responses on his blog, the White Knight impression could get a few cracks. Humans are visual beings, so twenty minutes or more of humiliation on video can do much more than hours of reading. Those who would still lick Ray's soles after that would have been lost to reason anyway.
ReplyDeleteAnd for the lulz.
I get the impression you don’t like Comfort. Calling Comfort “The worlds stupidest Christian” is out of ignorance. You have to give Comfort some credit for the work he has done, the speeches, book writing (70 apx) and the countless hours as a street preacher (since 1970). You also have to give some respect for his tenacity. Comport has a very strong position in the Christian community and very well respected. I am not a Ray Comfort fan, but if you underestimate his experience with a phase “The worlds stupidest Christian” your severely underestimating your opponent.
ReplyDeleteThunderF00t? Who is ThunderF00t? What are credentials other than just his videos on Youtube? Is he a PhD student? A professor in a teaching position, has he any papers, research or otherwise? Has he ever debated anyone, who, where, when? I am not trying to knock TF, but I think you are overestimating his abilities.
The other reason I am writing this is I am really surprised of the tone from a member of the Atheist Experience. It seems you want to examine the fact from an emotional response then one from reason. I can see why some Christians feel unbelievers just belittle them and from this I can see why.
Thanks.
I quite going to that idiot's blog. Here's an example of why we should ignore him. He made a post about how "Expelled" shows how "darwinism" was responsible for the holocaust, I shot him down totally, and this was his reply.
ReplyDeleteFortunately, some others did not like his, and his sycophants' stupid attitude.
The irony? He's the one who's written a book called "You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think".
Calling Comfort “The worlds stupidest Christian” is out of ignorance.
ReplyDeleteYou may have a point. Saying such things borders close to an ad hom attack, although it doesn't as Martin and others go on to explain why they think Comfort is the "world's stupidest Christian" instead of leaving that as their sole argument against him. It may be more accurate to say that Comfort's arguments are stupid, ignorant and severly misguided (which they are) and to add that his intentions are probably good and that he really does believe what he claims to believe. However, there is reason to think otherwise about him, though not his arguments, in this regard.
As the old saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Also, if his intentions are that good, why does he patently ignore all responses to his arguments except to dishonestly quotemine them later. If he really wanted to help people out, wouldn't he be better served by getting to the truth of the matter first?
Sure he may already believe he has gotten to the truth and all responses are simply attempts to mislead him and others. Still, if that is the case, on some level he must have to wonder why the need to dishonestly misrepresent the views and claims of those that oppose him. On some level he must realize that that is what he is doing. There really is no way it is accidental. Even if he doesn't recognize this then, were he sincere and sure of the validity of his position, then the claims that he is should motivate him to evaluate his actions further to ensure that he is not misrepresenting others, intentionally or otherwise. If he has the truth, afterall, why engage in such duplicity?
As for Comfort's beliefs, does he really believe what he claims? No one could say or sure except Comfort himself but I doubt we'd get any kind of answer out him. What he claims to believe is so absurd that many if not most people wouldn't accept it but it may make sense in his worldview. However, he was quick to drop his bananna argument, which he presented as "The Atheist's Nightmare". Maybe the title was just dramatics. Since he is resistent to drop his other arguments that have all equally been shot down this indicates that he either knew it was a realy weak argument, and thus he really didn't buy it himself, or that he realized that he simply didn't think it through. If it is the former an earnest person would question why they would present an argument they didn't accept in an attempt to persuade others. If it is the latter an honest person would see that as a reason to reassess the initial beliefs surrounding the argument for error. Given his typical actions since we can be reasonably sure he did neither.
There is also a third opition: he doesn't really believe any of the bilge he spews but he knows that it'll make him money. He has claimed on his videoes that a Christian shouldn't want to use their Christianity to make money yet that is what he tries to do with his books and his ridiculous speaking fees. Given this, how strongly can we say Comfort believes what he claims he does?
Maybe you're right that we shouldn't say Comfort is the "world's stupidest Christian" because it might make us appear to be as closed- minded or unreasonable as he is, especially to those that may be on the fence. However, you are wrong that it is out of ignorance. Nothing you go on to say about this supports that claim. Indeed, it is because we know what Comfort has to say, is saying and how absurd and dishonest it is that we attach that moniker to him.
Continued from the above post as it was too long apparently:
ReplyDeleteThunderF00t? Who is ThunderF00t? What are credentials other than just his videos on Youtube? Is he a PhD student? A professor in a teaching position, has he any papers, research or otherwise? Has he ever debated anyone, who, where, when? I am not trying to knock TF, but I think you are overestimating his abilities.
The same could be and has been rightfully said of Comfort. Maybe you should watch some of Thunderfoot's videoes as I think most of your questions can be answered there, including what his credentials are if you really want to know.
@Jonathan
ReplyDelete"Calling Comfort “The worlds stupidest Christian” is out of ignorance. You have to give Comfort some credit for the work he has done, the speeches, book writing (70 apx) and the countless hours as a street preacher (since 1970). You also have to give some respect for his tenacity."
The cow outside my window is also mooing and shitting all day long...that doesn't make her intelligent nor is it something I have to give her credit for.
Still, she might be smarter than Ray since she usually doesn't step into her own excrements nor does she keep repeatedly smacking her face against the trees on the meadow.
Wait, I realize that I was mistaken and now actually do get your point:
Ray isn't stupid. 'Ray Comfort' is an artificial character; an act played by a conman of the like that isn't hard to find among the religious.
Who is ThunderF00t? What are credentials other than just his videos on Youtube? Is he a PhD student? A professor in a teaching position, has he any papers, research or otherwise? Has he ever debated anyone[...]?
This is where you betray yourself. Oh, the hypocrisy, the special pleading, the argument from authority... just ludicrous! You made my day!
It seems you want to examine the fact from an emotional response then one from reason.
Could you have a point here...? Nah, not really. Who said reasonable people had to be robots without feelings? Not every pathos is an appeal to emotion. There's a big difference between demonstrating a point in an emotional fashion and basing your argument on one.
I can see why some Christians feel unbelievers just belittle them and from this I can see why.
Oh, now I see. You were just talking about yourself.
@Jeremy
ReplyDeleteSire, I humbly bow before you. It seems you have beaten me fair and square by just a few turns of the watches hand.
I can't wait to watch it, sure most of what you said is likely to come true but at the end of the day it's going to be entertaining which is a lot of the reason I watch the Atheist Experience, god bless you MattD.
ReplyDeleteYou can't take this seriously at all, a few people will do and they are people are fundamentally beyond help, people who can be convinced of god or even have their faith affirmed because of argumentum ad bananaulum seriously needs to go back to school.
I'm not generally in favour of intellectually pounding on stupid people, but when they push themselves in to the public domain like that, then they're fair game. Since we have to put up with them either way, we might as well have a good laugh about it.
For Jonathan:
ReplyDeleteWe're underestimating Ray? No, we're not! We've seen this dumbass debate. You want to give him respect for writing books and street preaching? So now we're supposed to respect the moron because he's spent so much time going on about his imaginary friend? If it weren't called a god, he'd be labeled as insane for that! And in none of those long hours or books has he successfully offered any evidence at all for the existence of this being. Have you seen him try to convince people to "bypass their intellect", or say that they don't need to learn any big words, or learn anything about the fossil record? He used air quotes when he said, "fossil record", by the way.
Instead, most of what he does is to shit on human progress, and to ridicule the science that gives his uneducated ass an easy ride in life.
Ray is one of the dumbest men on Earth (have you even SEEN the crocoduck?). Thunderf00t, on the other hand, has demonstrated his intelligence, knowledge of science, and ability to detect a BS argument when he hears it.
Your argument has no legs, and I find its stupidity to be quite offensive.
Jonathan, have you heard Ray debate? I have his most recent debate from earlier in the year in NZ up on Youtube, Part 1 is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM4IvG09uZ8
ReplyDeleteI enjoy watching tools like Ray, Kent and Venomfangx get destroyed in debates and videos. I say do it for sport if nothing else.
ReplyDeleteBenedikt- Thanks.
ReplyDelete"I quite going to that idiot's blog. Here's an example of why we should ignore him. He made a post about how "Expelled" shows how "darwinism" was responsible for the holocaust, I shot him down totally, and this was his reply.
ReplyDeleteFortunately, some others did not like his, and his sycophants' stupid attitude.
The irony? He's the one who's written a book called "You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think"."
Thank you Reynold (Ryan Reynolds?) Either way I'm gonna wind up imaging you as Deadpool now, for providing documentation and examples of why, Johnathan, Ray is a dishonest ass. That is perhaps the most potent deconstruction of him I've seen. It's celarly he did not read or address your points.
Again that's why I'm not all for the Thundy debate. Thundy effectivly addressed all his points already so it's nothing new to the people who actually listen to both sides, and Ray NEVER listens to the other side of a debate. He talks to himself, and declares himself the winner.
Debating Ray is like playing chess against a 8 year old who immediately moves the knight across the board and declares "king me!" No matter how confident or well meaning they are they're doing it wrong. And I do NOT think we should give Ray credit for his work, in the same way we shouldn't give the writers of the Protocols of Zion credit for their work. Shit is shit no matter how good the bowl movement makes the mover feel.
Debating Ray is like playing chess against a 8 year old who immediately moves the knight across the board and declares "king me!"
ReplyDeleteIng, you've really nailed it! I can think of other fundies to whom this would apply as well.
(Come to think of it - are there any to whom it wouldn't apply?)
Admin said, "Ray is one of the dumbest men on Earth (have you even SEEN the crocoduck?)".
ReplyDeleteThe Crocoduck think was Kirk Cameron. You simply must include him in the list.
As far as whether to debate Mr. Comfort, I struggle with that one myself but I think Thunderf00t will make short work of him and Ray will have difficulty spinning it.
As far as fighting with Ray on his blog, it's just too hard to avoid. I think keeping him busy on his blog is a positive thing, especially when most of the Atheist have an easy time exposing the fundies.
"I get the impression you don’t like Comfort. Calling Comfort “The worlds stupidest Christian” is out of ignorance."
ReplyDeleteAre you sure it's out of ignorance? Because from what I have seen, Comfort has earned this title outright. Just watching a single debate and the banana video will be enough evidence to support the claim. I would have to say your claim is out of ignorance. But, as Ray would do, I am sure you will ignore that.
-
"...if you underestimate his experience with a phase “The worlds stupidest Christian” your severely underestimating your opponent."
-
"I am not trying to knock TF, but I think you are overestimating his abilities."
uhhh...exact opposite of what you said
Umm... isn't your show all about debating theists?
ReplyDeleteI'm just asking...
In EVERYONE'S defense. There is a big difference between a theist and Ray Comfort.
ReplyDeleteI can understand the frustration, but debating Ray Comfort and co might sadly be a necessity. The atheist version of Calvary I am sure, but still... Because however stupid and uninformed and intellectually dishonest he is, he still has followers and can still be harmful. He just reminds me of an astrologer we had in Quebec in the 90s, named Jojo Savard. She was still making loads of money from gullible people, so skeptical associations was criticizing her, and rightly so, while mainstream talkshows were inviting her and letting her promote her rubbish, thinking it was harmless.
ReplyDeleteI think that this explains Ray's "Rayness". Curiously, I remembered the character's name as "Ray" and, upon rewatching it, was shocked to discover that it was really "Leonard".
ReplyDeleteI know you dont want to talk about him...but rebutting his ridiculous beliefs and statements is kind of fun.
ReplyDeleteI just had to comment here and show you that Ray has just posted the best Blog Post ever...I have no idea how he will ever come back from this:
http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-god-guilty-of-murder.html
enjoy/ignore. :)
Yeah it was a pretty great one. God is a murder, and he's coming to murder you, so praise jesus!'
ReplyDeleteI won't go there. I have too much respect for myself.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion/debate/talk in question seems to be posted on youtube now.
ReplyDeleteSo far I've only seen the first video. While it is refreshingly civilized it seems to be somewhat unbalanced.
On the one hand you have someone interested in a discussion who's struggling with being precise, consistent, intellectually honest... and on the other hand you have a debater who disregards facts, contradicts himself in a matter of seconds without flinching, never concedes any points made and just jumps to the next topic by unreeling the next canned statement.
The only thing new, that is I haven't heard creationists say that yet, is the following statement:
"'You don't know' is the ultimate cop-out."
-- Ray Comfort
Nothing reveals the apologists' mind better than that, doesn't it. They sheer stupidity, or maliciousness -- if you manage to decide the fool vs. con-artist question, is mind-boggling.
In case some IDiots still don't get it and in danger of stating what should be obvious:
It's like saying "White is the ultimate black" and either being too retarded to understand what complete garbage that statement is... or hoping the listeners will be. "I don't know" is the ultimate unbiased place-holder requesting further investigation, the exact opposite of a cop-out such as "God did it".