wobble,
Pisswordprotected's cut & paste rubbish was from William Lane Craig, he is often looked up to quite highly by budding apologists because he usually (though certainly not always) does well in his debates. But he does well because he starts his debates by setting up literally every argument for the existence of God that there is (all of the ones i mentioned in the first post), & then he expects his opponents to go through each of them individually & dismantle them, one by one. There just simply is not enough time to do this in a debate & failure do so constitutes a win in WLC's eyes. That's not to mention the fact that most of his opponents are not scientists who are knowledgeable on the subject anyway.
He also gives his opponents the task of 'proving atheism'. This is simply an impossible task & not one that is even necessary, since no athiest claims to be able to prove that God does not exist. But it just goes to show how little WLC really knows about the subject, he is just a showman, & a very preachy one at that. He is also a closet creationist, except for when he is being interviewed by his own people (other creationists), on those ocassions he comes out of the closet specially for them.