08-04-2009, 10:51 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/w1Y6ev152BA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/w1Y6ev152BA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
08-04-2009, 11:20 PM
His water theory is screwed , running water doesnt freeze
08-04-2009, 11:33 PM
Craig's knows how to debate, there is no denying that. In fact, one of the best compilations of his debates is by an atheist blogger: http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=392. As he puts it, Craig pretty much wins every debate, usually handily. Most the people who debate him just aren't prepared/educated enough in the various fields that Craig is to engage him very well (though there are some more compelling/competitive debates toward the top of the list).
There are, however, some more worthwhile rebuttals to be found to Craig's main teleological, epistemological, moral, and resurrection arguments: http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=2963. I don't present this so much as "proving" Craig wrong, but I think the links on that page provide a much stronger/worthwhile approach to Craig's arguments than many of his debate opponents have mustered. A lot of it is fairly dense, academic work (Harris or Hitchens this is not), but that's the territory in these kinds of debates.