C- [creation] rap on Dogma Debate


Creationists are typically pretty wriggly and hard to pin down. So when I argue with them, I don’t often get the ‘corner-and-kill’ moment. I usually can’t get them into that position where it becomes obvious to all listeners that the quarry knows he was caught in a lie. It’s always interesting when your opponent realizes that he can’t defend his position, and is forbidden to concede some academic point that was clearly lost, but escape isn’t possible either because you won’t let him change the subject. If you can get him there, and press him to hold him accountable, you’ll either witness a psychotic episode, or a lie so blatant that it counts as an admission of defeat.  That’s what I got last night on the Dogma Debate podcast with creationist rapper, ‘Destiny Lab’.

Comments

  1. Z says

    Well done Aron! A very sweet moment and a fine example of how to hold people accountable for the implications of their statements…

  2. Lord Narf says

    Nice. I’ve vaguely heard of the podcast before, but I’ve never actually checked it out. I’ll go grab the last few episodes.

    • Lord Narf says

      Hooooooooooooly, crap. I just finished the section with the rapper. You just lay it out for him … piece by piece …

      How can someone not see what a blatant lie they’re telling, after it’s put in that kind of order? Here’s the claim that there’s no explanation for this thing. Here’s the explanation for this thing. Is there an explanation for this thing? No.

      What the fuck? How do you even begin to reach someone like that? Grrrrrrrrrrrr. How were you not screaming, like you were at Sye Ten Bruggencate, Aron? Or is that in the section I haven’t listened to, yet?

  3. James McMullen says

    Wow. That Christian rapper was just so utterly out of his league when it came to dealing with your carefully and calmly explained facts that I think he did indeed perhaps have a psychotic episode. You left him with no possible escape in a prison of cold logic, and he essentially just put his hands over his ears and retreated into his shell.

    I do hope he has the guts and the introsection to download the podcast and listen to himself absolutely flailing in a few months, after the denial has a chance to have worn off a little.

    • Lord Narf says

      I do hope he has the guts and the introsection to download the podcast and listen to himself absolutely flailing in a few months, after the denial has a chance to have worn off a little.

      I do that sort of thing, since I’m an emotional masochist, but I don’t think most creationists have that level of intellectual integrity. Listening to my shows (on the rare occurrence that they’re recorded) sucks, but I make myself do it and analyze the hell out of them.

  4. mikes says

    Aron,

    I’m trying to separate features of epistemology from pragmatic choices in definitions.

    At 20:50 you define “proof” and “evidence” and explain that one consequence of your definitions (at 21:36) is that a fact that concords with two logically exclusive claims is not evidence of either.

    If I have three propositions: (X, Y, and Z), each of which logically excludes the other two, and P(X | E) >> P(X) and P(Y | E) >> P(Y) and P(Z | E) < P(C) and P(C | E) > P(C | not E)

    I.e. E is evidence for C when the likelihood of C given that E is known is greater than both
    1. C when the truth of E is unknown
    2. C when the inverse of E is known.

    E.g. P(house_on_fire | smoke) > max(P(house_on_fire), P(house_on_fire | no_smoke))
    regardless of the relationship between smoke and other propositions like neighbor_having_barbeque and son_is_a_stoner.

    cheers

  5. PStryder says

    The creationism test has been found to be at a private religious school in Kentucky.

  6. UnsaltedSinner . says

    Oh, the humanity! I’ve never been a smoker, but after listening to the last part of that discussion, I feel like I should light up a cigarette. Still, I’m sure he’s telling all his friends how he crushed Aron Ra in a debate, because Aron Ra couldn’t explain where all the parts and the fibonacci spirals and everything came from…

  7. Pete says

    What a crap argument “atheists have empty shallow lives”, being a sock puppet of some ‘higher power’ really is shallow and meaningless (I’ve heard several times “I’m nothing without $deity )

  8. bradman1203 says

    Well done, Aron on this debate, and also on your demolition of Ray Comfort. It’s high time these creationists were called out on their blatant and repeated dishonesty.

    The final meltdown of this twerp was both unsurprising (typical behaviour of a liar caught out), and shocking (laid bare in public, but refusing to accept what everyone had proven).

    Very enjoyable, and keep nailing ‘em up.

  9. says

    Now that was fun. I felt a little sorry for Archelogic, outnumbered and outclassed as he was on every turn. However, he made the claims, his song ‘A Happy Atheist’ was extremely condescending and insulting, so it was justice due. Great stuff.

    • Lord Narf says

      Yup, after the ignorant stuff he said in his songs, he deserved a lot of smacking around. I didn’t feel very sorry for him. Pure entertainment.

  10. Kimpatsu says

    Is it just me? The podcast froze 54 mins, in, just after the immature “There is no book of Hezekiah” ‘gotcha’ bait and switch.
    Is there any way to download the entire podcast to my iPod?

  11. Ronnie Cameragh says

    Mr. Ra, isn’t the aging overweight sagging hippie look getting a little old?

    And the fake name doesn’t exactly encourage confidence in your integrity.

    The Hat, the Beard, the sunglasses…what are you subconsciously hiding from?

    • Entrak Entshuldiga says

      So.. You have no rebuttals to the arguments and resort to discussing the person instead.

      Does not exactly encourage confidence in your own integrety, does it?

      What are you subconciously hiding from? :)

      • tiberiusbeauregard says

        Oh you’re so privileged.
        Can’t you see Ronnie comes from a scientology background and believes that “What is your crime?” is a perfectly legitimate way to introduce yourself to another person…

    • Lord Narf says

      Hippie? Seriously? If anything, he looks more like a Hell’s Angel, not a hippie. They’re kind of anti-hippies. At least learn to be accurate with your childish slander.

    • says

      Ronnie, if I look like I’m 50, it’s probably because I’m 50. I don’t have any problem with that, because I’ve had a much better youth than you did or will. I can tell that much just from your post.

      Now if I wanted to be a childish troll too, I would glance at any picture of you and insult your hairstyle, or make vague insinuations about your lack of fashion sense, your imposed conformity fearing attention, your physical defects, or what sort of repressed psychological disorders you might have. No doubt I will prefer my look over yours. I wouldn’t do that however, because I’m better than that. I can rely on the strength of my argument, and you’d be no challenge to me in any case.

      But I can’t look at any pictures of you, can I? Because you appear to be just another closeted nobody on the interwebs. That’s how brave you’re not. I’m the one in front of the camera or on stage addressing live and occasionally hostile audiences and protest groups all over the US and in other countries too -yet you somehow think that face-to-face confrontation with potentially dangerous religious whackos = hiding. What a strange juxtapositional delusion you have! I think you’re trying to project your own faults and your own inhibitions of inadequacy onto those who will not share them.

      Don’t expect me to give you any more of my time; you didn’t deserve this much.

  12. skepticallydenpa says

    That was a wonderful episode. I especially love how you continued to nail him to that one point. For him to concede the point, while denying it’s importance to the creationist stance, was too much for him. It’s this kind of focus that I’m missing from my own debates; so it’s nice to see it applied expertly.

    • Lord Narf says

      Well, you can’t actually do that, in a formal debate. That’s why I’m not a fan of the format, and creationists are. You get no back-and-forth, in a formal debate structure, just 5 minutes of uninterrupted lecturing, during which a creationist can say more wrong things than you can correct in an hour.

      • skepticallydenpa says

        Haha. Well all of my debates are informal. But yes, the structure of a formal debate is what makes special moments like this such a rare occurrence. JT’s debate against Bill Victor also contained one of these rare moments,(which we can blame on Victor’s lack of experience in common apologist tactics and for the moderators allowing the Q&A towards the end to become a more casual conversation between him and JT). I recommend it if you haven’t seen it.

  13. Marcus28 says

    Can someome please post a link to the audio? My screenreader is having a hard time with the Dogma Debate site.

  14. =8)-DX says

    I do that sort of thing, since I’m an emotional masochist, but I don’t think most creationists have that level of intellectual integrity

    Now now, don’t hide behind intellectual integrity once you’ve already admitted emotional masochism as your motivation. Perhaps the problem with creationists is that they are intellectual sadists who want to cause us pain when we listen to their nonsense XD..

    • Lord Narf says

      It’s not so much that the masochism is the motivation. It’s more of an enabling factor.

  15. slatham says

    I listened to it on low at work, and I think I heard all the important parts. I think the segment would have been improved if the creationist rapper was asked to define irreducible complexity. I believe he didn’t really know what it means. Did I miss something?

    • Rexsalad says

      That was my take too. Like his use of the Ken Miller Dover quote his explanations sound confused rather than consciously duplicitous. I seriously doubt he has ever questioned any of his positions as rigorously as Aron exhorted him to. Nevertheless by refusing to accept that his erroneous information has been refuted he commits a de facto lie.

  16. says

    I’m excited to find this website. If you don’t mind I would also share a word of advice. Fidning a sexy muscles nude man at love could be dificult, in case you reside in Sourthern California and you also desire a Personal sexy muscles nude man, mouse click my link.

  17. SnowyBiscuit says

    Listed to the debate, which was enjoyable.

    But amazed that Destiny Lab has managed to create something worse than regular rap. He should be subtitled “I found the Lord and lost my talent”.

  18. says

    Just an FYI: Archalogik (Destiny Lab) created an account at the League of Reason and was trying to spin this event in his favor. He still does not understand that the bacterial flagellum is not irreducibly complex, even after he pointed out that the bacterial flagellum is made with the type-III secretory apparatus. Apparently, he does not understand his own argument.

    He has run off now, but I thought you might be interested in leaving your two cents on that thread.

    • Lord Narf says

      This reminds me of an amusing fact in the creation/evolution debate. We understand their own arguments better than most of the creationists do. That’s at least partially by design, too.

      For example, Behe does this thing in his books, where he includes bits of the most technical, unintelligible verbiage, boxed off into sections that people aren’t actually supposed to read. He just uses the text to point at and say, “See? This is really scientific stuff, folks, and you can trust my broad assertions that have nothing to do with the technical words I just used.

      They actually don’t want people to know the real arguments, because the arguments are crap. The style they use fits with the authoritarian mindset of the religious people they’re preaching at.

      On the other side, people like Dawkins and Jerry Coyne try to break everything down into the most easily understood language to get their points across.

  19. says

    I just wanted to make a brief remark to express gratitude to you for all the lovely hints you are posting on this website. My time-consuming internet research has now been honored with brilliant facts to write about with my visitors. I would assert that many of us site visitors are undoubtedly lucky to live in a fabulous website with so many perfect people with insightful methods. I feel rather privileged to have encountered your website page and look forward to really more cool minutes reading here. Thanks once more for everything.

  20. says

    Pretty section of content. I just stumbled upon your weblog and in accession capital to assert that I get actually enjoyed account your blog posts. Any way I’ll be subscribing to your augment and even I achievement you access consistently fast.

  21. says

    Great goods from you, man. I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re just too magnificent. I actually like what you have acquired here, certainly like what you are stating and the way in which you say it. You make it entertaining and you still care for to keep it smart. I can’t wait to read far more from you. This is actually a tremendous site.

Trackbacks