Thoughts on the ABC debate from last night
May 6th, 2007 • atheism, christianity, debate
I culled this first from Pharyngula and then from digg to get a rounded idea of other people’s thoughts.
What comes from the Dawkins forums is of no surprise but reading the comments from Pharyngula were interesting. Myself, like many others, think that Comfort’s argument is completely bizarre. In the banana video, Comfort goes on record to state that during the big bang, there was a bubbly fizzy brown liquid “created” and it just sat there…assumptively in the same spot. Then after millions of years, aluminum gathers around the fizzy brown liquid and somehow magically takes the form of our well known soda can. And if by “duh” moment, that can was then topped with a top and given a tab. Comfort then goes on to babble about how paint magically fell from the sky on to the can — and only the can — to paint it in now familiar colours. So is he saying that Coke and Pepsi have been around since the dawn of time? I’m flabbergasted. But no, this is his argument about atheists being “dumb” and non-intellectuals.
Comfort espouses that everything must have been created by someone — gee, that’s a deep statement. Buildings have builders (but not architects?), soda cans have soda can makers (does he know that robots make these cans?), paintings have painters, and so on and so forth. So during the debate when audience questions were fielded, I wonder why no one asked “If everything has a creator, does the Creator too have a Creator?”. I know I would have and would have gotten a great chuckle out of his rebuttal.
This is what is so many Christians think and they call non-theists crazy but I wonder if they will ever look in the mirror.
