Comfort Wants to Debate Dawkins

February 20, 2009 By gwesley 37 Comments

Hi, all… it’s me, Trina.

So, as I am sure many of you have heard, Ray Comfort has joned the Examiner as the “Creationism Examiner.”

Of course, I haven’t seen much along the lines of creationism in his articles so far, but we shall see.

Anyway, I am not here to talk about Ray’s new column… no, no. But I am here to talk about Ray.

It seems he has issued a challenge to Richard Dawkins. He is offereing him $10,000 to debate him.

Although that link won’t take you to Ray’s post about it on Examiner, I wanted to share a comment I saw there.

The poster, Kitty, said something like… “after hearing your debate with Dan Barker, I don’t think you’d know what a debate was if it bit you on the banana.”

I sincerely hope Richard doesn’t stoop to do it. Quite frankly, I don’t think Ray is worthy of Richard’s time. But that’s me. :)

Filed Under: General, Trina Hoaks 37 Comments
  • Mustafa Mond, FCD

    Ray is not a man of his word. He still owes me $10,000 from a previous challenge.

    You just can’t trust those Christians, they have no moral base.

  • http://kickfateintheface.blogspot.com Chad Brown

    I hope not either.. however much I’d love to hear Richie tear him a new one, its beneath him.

  • BZ

    Hehe, you forgot a title.

    Also, I would like to say that Ray isn’t worthy of our time either.

  • SASnSA

    Hey I actually found some truth in one of Ray’s statements! It’s gotta be a first.

    “The problem is that the god Mr. Dawkins doesn’t believe in, doesn’t exist.”.

    Considering RD doesn’t believe in any God, Ray’s statement is actually more true than he meant it to be.

  • http://humanistdad.blogspot.com HumanistDad

    I’d probably donate to raise $10,000 for a charity if Ray Comfort would actually learn what evolution really means.

  • http://www.nullifidian.net/ nullifidian

    If it’s anything like Comfort’s prior $10,000 “reward” then it’s going to be a complete set-up from the beginning.

    And (equally likely) Comfort is just trying to set-up Dawkins as an unwilling shill: no matter how insanely pathetic Comfort’s arguments are (and we already know exactly what they’re going to be (“painting /painter, building/builder” yadda yadda…)) he will nevertheless claim it as a “victory” just as he does on every other occasion, feel smug at “defeating” the “pope of the atheists” (ptoo!) and gain even more “kudos” (or whatever the nearest christian equivalent is) amongst his vacuous sheep.

    Dawkins shouldn’t even acknowledge this “challenge”. Besides, I would consider it rude of him to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

  • freelancer

    Ray wouldn’t even be worthy of ERV’s time, even if she presented the case for atheism in LOLSPEAK.

  • Richard Wade

    What amazingly shameless vanity Comfort has, and what an inflated self image.

    Maybe I can bribe World Heavyweight Boxing Champion Vitali Klitschko to go ten rounds with me for ten thousand dollars. The fact that he is 37 years old, stands 6 foot seven and half inches and weighs 250 pounds means that I would last about 0.07 seconds. In fact, I probably would not survive the handshake. But that’s okay, because my purpose would be to steal fame from him, to embarrass him for demeaning himself with such a pathetic mismatch, and most of all to gain even more admiration from my idiot fans who would declare me the winner even as they rushed me to the hospital.

    If you were unfortunate enough to watch the sad, pathetic and mind-numbing farce that was called a “debate” between Comfort/Cameron vs. Sapient/Kelly you may remember it as I do, that although Comfort and Cameron made complete asses of themselves, their devotees still thought they “won” and Sapient and Kelly only came across as undignified, left incredulous by the world class stupidity of their opponents’ babbling inanities. It was a mistake to do it and a mistake to watch it.

    If you’re going to beat the crap out of someone who is full of crap, you’re going to end up with crap all over you.

  • http://terahertzatheist.ca Ian

    I’ve heard Dawkins’ speaking fees are on the range of $10-50K, so I think Comfort will need $100K before it will be worth it (and then Dawkins can spend the money on atheist buses!)

  • Hal in Howell MI

    A debate should be held only if Ray Comfort makes a public statement that he is donating the $10,000 to the Atheist Bus Campaign. In return, each bus sign would gratefully acknowledge that it was made possible by the generosity of Ray Comfort. Otherwise, that Bible-thumping twit should just F*** Off!

    P.S. Prof. Dawkins is appearing at Michigan State University in East Lansing on Monday, March 2. Got tickets. Hurray!

  • Hal in Howell MI

    Damn, Ian beat me to it.

  • http://blocraison.blogspot.com Paul Fidalgo

    I hope he doesn’t either, I think it only serves to legitimize Comfort. (Blog-whoring alert!) I struggle with the question of what to do with Comfort here.

  • Mustafa Mond, FCD

    An opportunity for Ray Comfort:
    Body donor needed for brain transplant

  • mikespeir

    “I thought Comfort was coming here to debate me.”

    “Look under your shoe.”

    (Dawkins raises his foot for a peek) “Oh. Clumsy me.”

  • http://www.noonespecial.ca/cacophony Tao Jones

    I don’t recall the exact passage or even the exact book, but…

    I think Dawkins said it best himself when he quoted a colleague of his who, after refusing a public debate with some religionist, said something like, “I can see what a debate would do for you… but not what it would do for me.”

    I’ll offer Comfort $10 to debate me. I’ll bring every type of banana species/cultivar I can get my hands on. We’ll have show and tell.

  • http://www.travisjmorgan.com Travis Morgan

    I don’t think Dawkins should do it. Ray appears to be a glory whore. He just wants to put on his resume that he debated Richard Dawkins. He wants to be seen as an equal. He shouldn’t be allowed to buy his way into this. He can’t even post a decent article to Examiner that isn’t without one or more logical fallacies. His arguments are old and have been refuted time and time again. He isn’t interested in coming closer to the truth.

  • Robin

    Comfort is a complete no-nothing whack-job. And so are his followers.

    So Dawkins would be lowering himself to their level by accepting the debate. Comfort could pull 50 million bucks out of the same place he pulls his books out of (i.e. his ass) and it still wouldn’t be worth Dawkins’ time.

  • Hal in Howell MI

    I neglected to mention in a previous post that I don’t think Prof. Dawkins should debate Ray Comfort. I agree with other posters that it really would be beneath him (Dawkins) to do so.

  • Martin

    How curious that worldnetdaily does not mention Dawkins’ longstanding stance on debating creationists. Anybody who deigns to even read the wikipedia page on him could have found that information. Is this just bad journalism?

  • JSug

    I don’t think Comfort expects Dawkins to accept. He just wants to be able to say that Dawkins is afraid to debate him.

    If it were me, I’d make Ray sign an agreement to donate the money to an Atheist cause of my choosing. Then, I’d show up the to debate with an air horn, and tell Ray I’m going to sound it any time he starts saying something factually incorrect or logically flawed. That thing would be going off all night.

  • http://skepticsplay.blogspot.com/ miller

    Ditto to Ian. I doubt that 10k is even enough to cover Dawkins’ usual speaking fee. I hear that Sam Harris costs like 30k.

  • Jonas

    I believe Dawkins has stated publically, or at least published that he doesn’t do the Creation/Evolution or God/No God debates. — Not that there isn’t a place for it. — But I agree with this thread that it is beneath him.

    Interesting point about the speaking fees, though. — It seems a setup to give Ray Comfort something to brag about.

  • Siamang

    I think that Dawkins should agree to a “debate by book.”

    As in, Ray-ray writes everything he wants to say about Creationism, Darwin, atheism in a book.

    And Dawkins also can say everything he wants about those same topics.

    And whoever sells the most books wins!

    Super-special bonus: you can actually read both books and see which one looks like it was written by someone who passed tenth-grade.

    Yeah, Ray just LOOOOVES thinking of the press this would get him.

    As Dawkins said “that would look rather good on your CV, not so good on mine.”

    Ray, you so WISH you were anywhere near the prominence that it would take to go toe-to-toe with Dickey-D. But of course you could always show up and ask open-miked questions.

    I notice you didn’t show up and avail yourself of that opportunity when Dawkins came here to town, Ray-Ray. Why not? A-scared?

  • Siamang

    ……and this is an untitled post trina.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-2044-Atheism-Examiner Trina Hoaks

    Thanks, Siamang. There was once a title… I must have accidentally deleted it before posting it.

    All better now. :)

  • Saint Splattergut

    When I read the title, I instantly lol’ed. I’m not sure what he thinks he’s going to get out of this… infamy? Well, he’s already got it. Girls? “Oh hun, it was so brave of you to debate, that nasty, shrill godless man…”

    Anyway, if he really had the balls, he would debate Hitchens and not Dawkins. RD is too much of a gentleman but Hitchens’ll give him what he deserves.

    Also,

    Richard Wade said
    “If you’re going to beat the crap out of someone who is full of crap, you’re going to end up with crap all over you.”

    Well said, dude. And well, this already happened to Hitchens a few times over, so…

  • http://princeofpithy.wordpress.com/ Prince of Pithy

    No matter what we do, Ray’s followers will claim victory. I’m almost of the opinion of putting the money towards an atheist charity, then spread the video of the beating as, “This is the best that creationism can do.” I also like the idea of an air horn.

  • http://thinkingisreal.blogspot.com/ AndyD

    Debating Ray on evolution and atheism would be like debating a plumber on brain surgery and particle physics. Sure, he might have an opinion but you can guarantee it won’t be based on any actual knowledge.

    My take on it all: Comfort challenges Dawkins to a debate

  • http://luminousmonkey.org/ LuminousMonkey

    If Ray has $10,000 to blow, shouldn’t he just donate it to charity anyway?

  • http://www.noonespecial.ca/cacophony Tao Jones

    Siamang said,

    I think that Dawkins should agree to a “debate by book.”

    …

    And whoever sells the most books wins!

    And if fundie churches just go out and buy thousands of books on their own to sit in a closet somewhere?

    Will you be prepared to accept Jesus Christ as your personal saviour when the free market has spoken?

  • Leanstrum

    I can’t help but agree that the debate would be a shameful and degrading affair. At the same time, the very fact that Comfort has made the offer means the damage is already done. If Dawkins accepts (which he won’t), Comfort’s already-overinflated sense of achievement will be expanded to dangerous proportions. But because Dawkins won’t accept, Ray will still convince himself that atheists are afraid to debate the issue due to the weakness of their arguments.

    It would be like a tennis match between Roger Federer and a chimp. Yes, Federer would serve devastating aces, but the chimp would be too busy throwing faeces and masturbating to notice.

  • http://www.otmatheist.com hoverFrog

    A debate requires discussion of a common topic. Ray’s trying to squeeze two debates in for the price of one:

    All I ask is that he goes into a studio and gives me 20 minutes on why there is no God and why evolution is scientific. Then I will give 20 minutes on how we can know God exists and why evolution is nothing more than an unsubstantiated and unscientific fairy tale for grownups. Then we both will have 10 minutes to respond.

    I’ll save Prof Dawkins some time.

    Why is there no God? Actually atheism doesn’t say that, atheism says that we don’t belief in gods of any kind. The burden of proof is on the person who claims that there is a god. We’re quite content
    to say that god is merely monumentally improbable, that no evidence exists to point to the existence of gods, that god is a meaningless concept, that god is philosophically unsound, a social construct and not really apparent. That doesn’t rule god out completely but it does leave it up to the theist to prove their claim.

    Evolution is scientific because it is a science. It is a formalised process to uncover the truth of a subject. Even if someone is stupid enough to deny that evolution is true they really cannot deny that it is scientific. It’s not just made up shit.

    Can I have $10k now please.

  • Pseudonym

    I wouldn’t “debate” Ray Comfort for the same reason why I wouldn’t “debate” Duane Gish or Christopher Hitchens. In a debate format, eloquence and rhetoric always beats cold hard fact.

    Actually, I’d like to see Comfort debating Hitchens. That’d be worth $10k.

  • http://mattstone.blogs.com Matt Stone

    I seriously hope Dawkins doesn’t accept. It would be an embaressment. Ray is not of the same calibure and not who I’d want representing Christians in a debate. Alestair McGrath … hell, even the Pope … just not Ray, anyone but Ray.

  • http://mattstone.blogs.com Matt Stone

    Actually, maybe we should get some Christians to debate Ray Comfort. Now there is something I would enjoy.

  • http://www.ziztur.com Ziztur

    The problem with debating Comfort is that he mixes in straw man science and fallacies in nearly every sentence that comes out of his mouth, and so anyone who gets an equal amount of time with him will not have enough time to hash through Comfort’s failure of logic and misunderstood science.

  • Pseudonym

    Matt:

    Actually, maybe we should get some Christians to debate Ray Comfort.

    Great idea! I nominate Ken Miller.