Suddenly, lots of people want to debate me. I’m really not that much into the debate business, and I think most of the people who want to battle me don’t need a high-level argument about biology — they need a remedial course in elementary science. Especially since most of the challenges are rather like this one:
Note that the drooling animals are clamoring for P.Z. Myers and Dembski to have a “debate.” What is to debate? Myers is a rabid mad man, completely out of control. His condition is progressive, irreversible, incurable and hopefully terminal.
Besides, Myers is an intellectual coward and won’t “debate” anyone of substance. Neither will Dawkins nor Hitchens. The word “debate” doesn’t even exist in the lexicon of science. It is reserved for lawyers, politicians and evangelists.
Myers immediately retired from the contest at “One Blog A Day” after arrogantly introducing his “Pharyngula” thread with much fanfare, leaving Martin and I with the wonderful opportunity (which we thoroughly exploited) to reduce the Darwinian hoax to a shambles. I sure hope someone preserved it because it is gone now.
I would love to confront him anywhere, with or without his equally deranged cronies – Dawkins and Hitchens. It would be a rout! I can’t even goad them into recognizing my existence. Myers is a cowardly victim, a “prescribed” vendor of hate, the epitome of cultural, moral and ethical evil. There is nothing that can be done for him or for his colleagues and followers. They are “born that way” losers in the lottery of life. Until they are gone they will remain a menace to Western Civilization. Hopefully that won’t take too much longer.
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
John A, Davison
Sorry, John, I do have standards, and I don’t debate the mentally ill and logically incoherent (really, read what you write. You sneer that “debate” isn’t in the lexicon of science while you challenge me to a debate. Think about it.) (Oh, wait, never mind. The irony of your challenge is so bold that it is clear that you don’t read your own words, and you definitely don’t think.)
And I’m currently scheduled to debate Angus Menuge of the DI this spring. I’ve already agreed to talk with one droning bore of a theologian, why should I also meet with Dembski?
P.S. Any of you drooling animals who wants to comment on this faces a challenge: Davison is banned here, as are his numerous pseudonyms, so you’re going to have to be circumspect lest you invoke his name and your comment ends up awaiting moderation.