|
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple
|
References for all videos related to the RRS v WOTM debate
Posted on: May 11, 2007 - 3:08pm
   Offline
References for all videos related to the RRS v WOTM debate
|
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2024.
|
Thank you very, very much for compiling all this and putting it all in one location.
Thanks.
Did someone wipe out the original message? Or was there a database error?
Debate Part 1
Debate part 2
I can't download from liveleak. Can you put them all on YouTube?
Some of the clips are too larget for YouTube to host : (
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
I found the entire debate in one MP4 file here. (600 MB)
The quality isn't the best I've seen though.
Did you guys see CBN's spinning of the debate? :
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/154223.aspx
"The hardest thing in life to do is to see things as they are, not as you want them to be."
"I do not despise believers. I find then neither rediculous nor pathetic, but I lose all hope when I see that they prefer the comforting fairy tales of children to the cruel hard facts of adults. Better the faith that brings peace of mind than the rationality that brings worry - even at the price of perpetual mental infantilism."
~Michel Onfray in Atheist Manifesto
the way of the master website is claiming that they gave Sapient an "outline" of what they would be saying ahead of time, and that Sapient knew they would be using the ten commandments, so they don't get why he was so shocked. while I find this hard to believe, I wanted to ask, did they give you (Sapient) any sort of "outline" at all ahead of time?
WOTM is really delusional. You ask them to prove that their "personal god" exists and what do they do....? They'll pick up the closest object of human engineering, point to it, and say this is creation and it proves my god exists, I really don't see their logic...
Slimm,
This becomes sort of a he-said-she-said issue. BUT, there is clear video of Ray and Kirk getting ready claiming that they will provide their case without appealing to the bible or faith. The mere claim that they are going to use "science and logic" to "prove god 100%"(?) means they shouldn't use the bible or faith, anyway.
Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
George Orwell.
I agree
Sapient, I am glad that you mentioned the 3rd Law of Thermodynamics. However, you should have mentioned the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, which contradicts Darwin's theory of Evolution. Which is more plausible?
[MOD EDIT - duplicate post removed]
I'm curious. Why are you glad about that?
No, it doesn't. If you care to know why, read this.
I hope you're not saying Genesis Ch. 1 is plausible.
Could somone provide links to the FULL unedited version of this debate.
The link goes to the site and the majority of the video's have been removed.
It would seem .. That someone doesn't want the entire debate to be shown.
Edit.. i found it. http://www.archive.org/details/MartinBashirRRSvsWOTM
Btw.... Sapient.... How did you resist punching that douchbag reporter in the face for being so blaitently stupid ?
Seriusly .. You have a hell of a lot of patience with people.