[ThinkPlease]

That's too bad. I rather wish people wouldn't debate a charlatan like Gish. His debating style is more suited to Elementary school than any professional field. It involves throwing out many half truths and mis-statements in his speech as possible, knowing that his opponent can't answer them all in his time alloted. He also knows that his (predominantly bussed in) church going audience isn't going to know any better, so they'll default to thinking that he won when the other guy can't answer all of the "problems". Gish knows its hard to accurately characterize a scientific problem in only a few minutes, let alone a multitude, so he capitalizes on it. No, give me the online written debate any day. Can you name an written debate where the creationist was considered to win? I can't. The results are much different when the field is more evenly tilted.

[balrog666]

BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA! A fundamentalist revival meetin' in progress.

[razorbak]

That's too bad. I rather wish people wouldn't debate a charlatan like Gish. His debating style is more suited to Elementary school than any professional field. It involves throwing out many half truths and mis-statements in his speech as possible, knowing that his opponent can't answer them all in his time alloted. He also knows that his (predominantly bussed in) church going audience isn't going to know any better,

The self-deluded hubris in the above statement is the attitude of most evos who do show up for debates with creationists, and why they get their clocks cleaned. They rely on insults and name-calling instead of debating the issue with facts.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights;

[gore3000]

I rather wish people wouldn't debate a charlatan like Gish.

Gish a charlatan? That from someone who is a follower of Darwin????????

Have not read his books, but I have seen him attacked by evolutionists here with ad hominems but no facts. The one time an evolutionist mentioned a fact on which he claimed that Gish was absolutely wrong was regarding the supposed first mammal. Gish had written that the top of the skull of that fossil presented as evidence by evolutionists was a paste up job. (this is important because the only 'mammalian' feature of it was the 3 earbones). When the evolutionist was finally forced to provide a picture of the skull in question it showed clearly that the skull was a paste up job.

The reason evolutionists attack Gish is because he is not one of them and goes around telling the false evidence used by evolutionists to promote their theory.