Jerry Coyne Criticizes A.C. Grayling’s Handling of God Arguments, But Coyne Gets It Wrong Himself
Jerry Coyne is a Harvard-educated, brilliant professor of biology who is an expert on biological evolution. His book, Why Evolution Is True, is a “must-read” for anyone interested in, well, why evolution is true. He also likes to write about topics outside of his area of expertise, including the philosophy of religion. As I’ve explained before, non-experts … Jerry Coyne Criticizes A.C. Grayling’s Handling of God Arguments, But Coyne Gets It Wrong Himself
25 Lines of Evidence Against Theism
Refutation of Anna Marie Perez Previous | Index | Next First Paragraph Here is Perez’s first paragraph: Atheism is a religion. Atheists act like Dracula confronting a cross when faced with the fact that their beliefs rely solely on faith. They hate the word faith, even though it’s all they’ve got. They try to make the … 25 Lines of Evidence Against Theism
A Nasty Christian Apologist Defends the Indefensible
There are many nice Christian apologists out there. To cite just four of several examples, (1) Glenn Miller; (2) Randal Rauser; (3) Trent Horn; and (4) Sean McDowell have both been extremely gracious as dialogue partner (1 & 2) or host (3&4). But there are also some nasty ones who apparently didn’t get the memo about 1 Peter … A Nasty Christian Apologist Defends the Indefensible
Dunning-Kruger Effect in Action: How NOT to Defend a ‘Best’ Explanation
I’m not going to name names, but I recently read something that could have not said more loudly, “I have no clue about inductive logic, Bayes’ Theorem, or inference to the best explanation. I definitely should NOT be defending my position publicly because I have no clue what I am talking about, but I’m going … Dunning-Kruger Effect in Action: How NOT to Defend a ‘Best’ Explanation
Draft Paper on the Jewish Hearsay Testimony and the Empty Tomb
I wrote this about 10 years ago but never finished it. In light of recent discussions, however, I thought it might be of interest to some readers. Please do not cite without my permission. Jewish_Hearsay_Evidence_v1.0_DRAFT_1 Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
Why I Do Not Equate Religious Belief with Mental Illness
I’m not a psychiatrist, but as a teenager I worked for an elderly woman who I later found out was a paranoid schizophrenic with organic brain decomposition. (As an aside, if you have any empathy at all, it’s impossible to get to know someone like this and not find their situation heartbreaking.) I agree that you … Why I Do Not Equate Religious Belief with Mental Illness
William Lane Craig Admits that His Fine-Tuning Argument is Based Upon Speculation
In my last post, I reported that WLC has reached the same conclusion I have regarding the scale of the universe as evidence against theism. After re-reading his article, I realized I missed an even more important announcement. Although he would deny it, in the same article he also admits that his fine-tuning argument is … William Lane Craig Admits that His Fine-Tuning Argument is Based Upon Speculation
William Lane Craig Endorses My Argument from Scale against Theism!
He doesn’t mention by name, of course, and may not have even had my argument in mind, but the sort of Bayesian considerations he raises support my Bayesian argument from scale, in two ways. First, he agrees with me about the “direction” the evidence points (against theism). Second, he agrees with me about the “magnitude” … William Lane Craig Endorses My Argument from Scale against Theism!
Apologist Responds? Check. Uncharitable? Check. Uses Cheap Shots and Insults? Check.
I stopped reading Triablogue some time ago, but today I decided to make an exception. After I posted my comment about the twin hypothesis, I thought to myself, “I’ll bet Steve Hays responds to this and uses the ‘Village Atheist’ tag.” My prediction was accurate. (See his post here.) In my comment, I didn’t defend the twin … Apologist Responds? Check. Uncharitable? Check. Uses Cheap Shots and Insults? Check.
Why Skeptics Do Not Need the Hallucination Theory to Reject the Resurrection
According to Victor Reppert, skeptics need the hallucination theory in order to reject the resurrection. Why? Read his blog post to find out. I see his point, i.e., I understand where he is coming from when he says that he thinks (non-extreme) skeptics need the hallucination theory. But I disagree with him for at least two reasons. First, Reppert assumes that … Why Skeptics Do Not Need the Hallucination Theory to Reject the Resurrection