William Lane Craig is “disingenuous,” and he “shocked” Larry Krauss in a recent debate?
|June 27, 2011||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Atheism, Video|
Paul Lucas offers atheist physicist Lawrence Krauss’s reflections on his debate with William Lane Craig (June 23, 2011), in interview with Michael Payton and Theo Warner. Krauss seems to regret it now and has nasty things to say about sponsor Campus Crusade for Christ, as well as Craig:
PM: … Craig draws a distinction between “Is there evidence..?” and “Is there compelling or good evidence?”. So it appears that he was under the impression that his only burden in the debate was to say that there was some evidence for God. I think that was evident in his equation, sort of meaningless equation that he put on…
LK: Yeah absolutely meaningless and disingenuous in the extreme. The use of those pseudo-equations at the beginning shocked me and it was only after the fact that it really upset me because it really indicated that he had no interest in explaining anything but rather hoodwinkin the students who were there.
Is Craig disingenuous? A hoodwinker? Is Krauss, called by Scientific American “one of the few top physicists who is also known as a “public intellectual“, a sore loser?
But actually, the subject for the debate got evolved several times because their initial desire was to have a topic that was much more emotionally charged. In fact, impossible to address. I think the original topic was ‘Has science done away with the need for God?’ or questions like that, which is like asking “When [will] you stop beating your mother?”, you know, or your son or whatever. That kind of topic is really inappropriate and what I wanted to ask was.. I wanted to centre on the question of evidence. I presented titles that were even clearer than that one but that was a reasonable compromise and I wanted centre around the question of ‘Is there a God?’, ‘Can science disprove God?’, ‘Do I believe science can disprove God?’ – all these things that I don’t think are relevant or interesting or answerable questions but rather, from an empirical perspective, is there evidence for God? And there the answer’s obviously “no” and so I thought it’d be worthwhile treating it from that point of view.
And much more. Thoughts, especially from those who watched the debate?
Is Craig disingenuous? Is Krauss a sore loser?
Follow UD News at Twitter!