Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are two of the very dumbest creationists you will find — and they were upset at the Blasphemy Challenge, so they demanded a chance to debate. And of course, since they are the dumbest, most inane, silliest creationists around, television executives jumped at the chance.
ABC loved the idea, and will host a debate in New York City on May 5, 2007. Moderated by Martin Bashir, the debate will be streamed LIVE on their website and will also be filmed for “Nightline.”
Cameron (“Growing Pains” sitcom and Left Behind movies) will speak on what he believes is a major catalyst for atheism: Darwinian evolution. The popular actor stated, “Evolution is unscientific. In reality, it is a blind faith that’s preached with religious zeal as the gospel truth. I’m embarrassed to admit that I was once a naïve believer in the theory. The issue of intelligent design is extremely relevant at the moment. Atheism has become very popular in universities–where it’s taught that we evolved from animals and that there are no moral absolutes. So we shouldn’t be surprised when there are school shootings. Cameron will also reveal what it was that convinced him that God did exist.
Yeah, right. The child-star of a pathetic sit-com is an expert on biology. Tying evolution to school shootings in this little précis tells me precisely how competent his argument will be. Of course, he’s a genius next to Comfort.
“Most people equate atheism with intellectualism,” Comfort added, “but it’s actually an intellectual embarrassment. I am amazed at how many people think that God’s existence is a matter of faith. It’s not, and I will prove it at the debate – once and for all. This is not a joke. I will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists.
Uh, the guy who thinks a banana is evidence for God is calling atheism an intellectual embarrassment?
I don’t want to watch this laughable piece of junk, but I’m going to have to insist that everyone who called Dawkins’ The God Delusion a poor examination of the legitimate and credible philosophy behind belief in a deity ought to be required to sit through it all, and then write a ten-page essay explaining why the Comfort/Cameron rationale really doesn’t count as a representation of real Christian belief. You heard me, people. This is your alternative. Take it like good little apologists and suffer.