CX

No.

Yes. *snort* There. Happy? :P

Family Man

Metacrock apparently believes that if he writes voluminous amounts of scholarly-sounding arguments the actual quality of said arguments aren't that important.

Metacrock isn't Godzilla. He's more like the gecko in those Geico commericials, but without the class.

Tyler Durden

Why not?
You misunderstood. I asked whether a snort was sufficient, not whether you would repeat yourself.

I'd like to see metacrock's arguments debunked just a teeny bit better than this demonstration of grunting.

Tyler Durden

I learned that first hand when i was a regular shit-disturber over at his forums. Of course, Metacrock suffers from the quantity over quality syndrome, we all have our quirks, but on his boards he behaves much better and is more courteous, even to atheists like me.

Uh-huh.

However, who else fills the Godzilla role on the sec web better? Who comes storming in here for a couple of weeks after months of inactivity, rustling the regulars from their stupor, (no thanks to the newbies and the run of the mill topics) with excessive shouting where insults fly quicker than usual, other than old Metacrock and his brand of liberal theology?

T. E. Lords

When I was a christian an argument I heard a lot was the that Bible was acurate and true because So many people had writen it over such a large span of time and in lots of different places. And all the people agreed and wrote about the same god.

not sure what that would fall under, but it was a common one.

CX

I was just being cheeky. Maybe someone else has the time patience and inclination to debunk metacrock, but I don't. Debunking in general is a lot like tilting at windmills. Maybe I'm a bad atheist and critical thinking proponent, but I have zero interest in refuting apologetic arguments.

CX

I LOVE that one. The idiocy of it is almost incredible.