WOTM Watchdog is a blog dedicated to investigating and exposing the lies and hypocrisies of Way of the Master and its affiliated ministries. It was founded by Former Follier, who regularly contributes content along with BoxerShorts (known as ThaiBoxerShorts on RRS) and Henwli. Their strategy thus far has been to attack the WOTM's methods rather than their message, pointing out the flaws in their intellectually dishonest and logically fallacious arguments rather than disputing the arguments head-on. Further investigations into WOTM's organizational structure are currently underway and will be reported upon on a later date.
This RRS child page is currently a work in progress, but will soon include links to new blog entries as they're posted, along with teaser paragraphs. Stay tuned.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5J0cSnYnFg
This video is the first time that we were on Bill O'Reilly. We were referred to as "they" and "the atheists" and the "opposition," but never by name. We were never contacted by O'Reilly or asked to appear on Fox in anyway. We've written to Bill O'Reilly many times in the last year, we have never had a response.
potheadpundit pothead pundit atheism atheist kirk cameron banana nightline debate challenge blasphemy evolution design Kirk Cameron pwned RRS Rational Response Squad debate Kelly and Sapient Bill O'Reilly review
From WOTMWatchdog.org:
Yes, the RRS vs. WOTM debate on ABC's NightLine is old news. It happened back in May. I remember joining the fray on ABC's message boards, teaming up with another atheist, a perfect stranger, who called himself Former Follier. Ah, the memories. Little did I know that one day, WOTM Watchdog would bring us together once again to battle the juggernaut directly.
But now we hear a side of the story that has never been told. Our good friend Brian Sapient of the Rational Response Squad has agreed to share some inside information regarding the lead-up to the debate... And it doesn't reflect well on Mr. Comfort and Mr. Cameron.
For those who watched the debate, do you remember the promos? I do. Mr. Comfort and Mr. Cameron stated repeatedly that they would prove the existence of God, "scientifically, absolutely, without mentioning faith or the Bible." In fact, they are directly quoted saying exactly that on the ABC News web page promoting the debate. It's a claim Mr. Comfort makes often. For another example, listen to his "What Hollywood Believes" sermon. Conveniently, this sermon was broadcast the Way of the Master Radio program on October 10th, while the radio team took a day off. Thus, it's available on their audio archives page.
Ignoring, for now, the gaping technical flaw in Mr. Comfort's argument... Well, okay. We won't ignore the technical flaws of Ray's argument. I just can't resist. Nothing can be proven scientifically and absolutely; science doesn't deal in absolutes. Nor does it deal in "proof." If it's proof you want, look into mathematics or formal logic. You'll find no such concepts in science, which only concerns itself with evidence. This is why nothing ever gets beyond the status of "theory" in science. If Mr. Comfort doesn't understand that, then he doesn't understand what the academic discipline we call "science" fundamentally is, and really shouldn't be throwing the word "scientifically" around. It just makes him look foolish. Anyway, back to the matter at hand. In the debate itself, "without mentioning faith or even the Bible" mysteriously became simply "without mentioning faith." When I first watched it, I didn't catch it. I had no idea that they tried to weasel their way out of their self-imposed terms until I saw Mr. Sapient's recently-released video. Rather convenient for Ray and Kirk, really, considering that they almost immediately invoked the Ten Commandments... Which, it turns out, are in the Bible.
Yes, there's really no way around it. The Rational Response Squad crew won this debate hands-down, and any honest, competent moderator would have granted them a decisive victory. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron clearly failed to stick to the terms of the debate. They even failed to stick to their own stated position. It's not that they're poor debaters, it's that they're liars. Sleazy, slimy, manipulative, and very, very slick liars indeed.
Remember, Ray: Your own God says that all liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire. Does he make exceptions for people who lie for Him?
DIGG this here