Greetings,

Thank you for the mention on your website.

Ed Brayton is not winning this debate, I assure you. He is clever with words, and even better at twisting the words of others. Name calling seems to be a specialty of his too. But does this surprise me? I have challenged him repeatedly to a face-to-face debate on creation evolution at a venue of his choice anywhere in the USA. He has declined of course, because he lacks the intestinal fortitude to face me personally like most people of his ilk.

I haven't even started to answer his ridiculous charges against me in the next round. But not to worry, we'll get there. It will be interesting to see if you post MY answers to Mr. Brayton, but I'm not holding my breath.

Yours Sincerely,

William J. Gibbons

Nice attribution of motive there...it could just be that he knows you're full of shit and doesn't deem it worth his time to appear on a stage with you, to give you the credibility you so obviously desire. So, how many accreditations does your program in "creationist apologetics" have?

This is quite amusing. Not only has Mr. Gibbons managed to plagiarize the work of other creationists without attribution, and then contradict the assertions he copied when he attempts to make arguments of his own, he can't even seem to repeat his own arguments accurately. It is not true that you have challenged me "repeatedly" to a face to face debate. You have done so once, here, and I answered it once. Here was my response then:

As much as I enjoy a good oral debate (I used to coach debate in my younger days), the answer is no. The reason is because oral debates are a transient, temporary and poor format for such discussions. I'd much rather have that debate here, in writing, where the full text is preserved for all to see well into the future. That way when you say that you didn't have any misquotes, a reader may simply follow the link to the previous exchange, find the citation and look it up for themselves. There is no point in trying to squeeze into a small time frame what can more accurately be done in writing here. I look forward to you crowing like a rooster about how I "refused" or "backed down" from your challenge. Rest assured that I will react with approximately the same amount of laughter with which I greeted being put on Karl Priest's "debate dodgers" list.

I've been involved in thousands of oral debates. I used to coach the activity and I've lectured on argumentation theory. The notion that I "lack the intestinal fortitude" and am afraid to "face you personally" is bullshit on stilts. But the fact is that oral debates are a terrible format for debating such an issue because sources can't be cited and checked on the spot. In writing, one can easily refer back to previous arguments, point out contradictions and inconsistencies, offer the context that is missing from misquotations. Written debates are, by any reasonable measure, a far better venue for handling citations to the scientific literature and the wide-ranging subject matter that is inherent to this issue. So no, I'm not going to indulge your desire to cover up the weaknesses in your position through an oral debate.

Hello,

Thank you for your reply, Jeff, and Mr. Brayton. Regarding our current exchange, I haven't even started yet.

I am intrigued as to why you so called "rationalists" seem so utterly incapable of replying to me without using foul and profane language. This tells me a great deal about your character or rather the lack of.

William J. Gibbons

William Gibbons wrote:

I am intrigued as to why you so called "rationalists" seem so utterly incapable of replying to me without using foul and profane language. This tells me a great deal about your character or rather the lack of.

And I would argue that the fact that you are more concerned with a few bad words than you are about telling the truth tells all that one needs to know about your character. Bullshit is bullshit, and accusing someone else of being a coward because they won't help you cover up the deficencies of your position by changing to a format that doesn't allow for reference checking or deliberate and unrushed analysis is, well, bullshit.

Gasp, bad words. Oh, I'm getting the vapors. No, wait, it's pseudo-intellectual posturing through the sweeping aside of substantive issues in favor of complaints about profanity that gives me pause.

Ed's right--bullshit is bullshit and you're full of it, William.

When Ed decides to take someone down, it's a thing of beauty to watch. Gibbons is in so far over his head it borders on pathetic; he's simply too ignorant or deluded to realize it. Still, Gibbons is good for some laughs. Lines like "I haven't even started yet" are hilarious, having a sort of Three Stooges-esque quality about them. I just bust a gut laughing.

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!

Gibbons hasn't even started yet? He's posted FOUR long essays in "Dispatches," all of which have been punk'd, junk'd and debunk'd. This isn't adult discourse; it's nothing but noise and bluster, which might work if you can physically indimidate your opponent with your presence, but doesn't work so well over the Internet. I guess Gibbons hasn't got the knack of the new technology...

Mr Gibbons avoids the point. Neither he nor any of his fellow creationists and IDers have presented any evidence for whatever their proposition is. If they did, I might sit up and pay attention to them. They have had hundreds of years to try to do so, and during that time period they haven't even tried to do so.

Speculation? Yes. Science? No. Speculation might be taught in speculation class, but not in science class.

raj,

evidence is such a modernist concept to be using with premodernists.

Plus, it's not speculation, it's apologetics--the retarded cousin of intellectual inquiry.

TrackbackMonday, August 29, 2005
No holds blog-style slap fight

It's never pretty when inflated egos are punctured by razor wits or eviscerated by the cold bitch-slap reason. I speak for no one else but myself here when I say that this is precisely the kind of bloody meat that keeps me coming back and pissing away untold hours reading through blog comments on sites like Pharyngula and Dispatches from the Culture Wars.

That is, in fact, exactly how I came across this priceless exchange between creationist right-wing twit William Gibbons and the occasionally sadistic Ed Brayton (of DftCW). The devils in the details and this one lives in the comments section of the Culture Kitchen.

BTW_ I am really glad that world class looney Pat Boone has entered into the sham debate over Intelligent Design. We all know how he speaks to all the cool kids now after releasing that rockin metal album a few years ago.

oops

That last one was supposed to be a trackback rather than a comment.

we appreciate both :)

Greetings All,

Well, I really MUST be doing something right to have solicited such profane responses. But then again, you must all be Democrats, the people who believe in freedom of expression right?

A right "wing nut?" I'm sorry, but do I know you? And how can you possibly know that I am "right wing?"

The simple fact is, you are all foul mouthed name calling cowards. I am an old soldier, and old soldiers don't run from battles.

Regarding my fourth exchange with the humble, retiring Ed Brayton, I haven't even taken the gloves off yet.

Yours Sincerely,

William J. Gibbons

The simple fact is, you are all foul mouthed name calling cowards.

I'll grant you fould-mouthed. And I make no apologies for it. Apparently, using nasty words (gasp) is a more telling commentary on a person's character than is lying and theft, which Ed has demonstrated you're quite comfortable with.

Oh, and some evidence of cowardice, please. And none of that "my cock is bigger than yours" bullshit about a face-to-face debate. That meaningless posturing on your part adds nothing to any kind of dialog. It's a diversion from the fact that you're a fool (again, a conclusion reached upon the evaluation of available evidence).

"But then again, you must all be Democrats, the people who believe in freedom of expression right?"

Are you implying that Republicans do NOT believe in the freedom of expression? Why you would think that was a good position to take?

I guess that is why you need to say "fuck" before you are allowed into Democratic rallies - Republicans won't be able to get past the door.

Good Morning Jeff,

Thank you for your response. How predictable you are.

I have already dealt with the plagiarism if that is what you are referring to. And lying? Please explain.

Again, your crude and disgusting language tells me a good deal about you. The fact remains you are a foul mouthed coward who is completely incabable of a civilized exchange. of course, we ought not to mention your appalling command of the English language. If you really want to insult me, then you should learn the Queen's English, old boy.

Now, if you will kindly excuse me, I have more important matters to attend, including my next exchange with Mr. Brayton.

Yours Sincerely,

William J. Gibbons

again, evidence for cowardice? Oh, name-calling.

oh, yes, and this queen's english is just fine. I'm actually able to use it in a variety of ways, depending on the context. It's called versatility. On this site, I generally don't use the same tone that I would in academic writing.

It's fairly typical of your type, though, to concentrate on extraneous issues, like swearing, as apposed to the fact that your entire approach is a fucking joke.

Maybe you should take those gloves off. Typing with them on has left you with some pretty incoherent posts.

So, Mister Gibbons, do you have any defense against Mister Brayton's argument that the only reason you insist on an oral debate and refuse a written one is that it would allow you make false claims without permitting people to check them?

Mr. Gibbons: would you care to comment on the defection of Dr. Davidson from the DI's list of 400 scientists supposedly questioning evolution? He specifically said that the "controversy" over the validity of evolution didn't exist, and that the DI was all marketing and no science. Any reaction to this?

Good Day Jeff and Raging Bee,

As I stated earlier Jeff, you are uncultured, foul mouthed coward. Profanity on a Blog is of course safer than insulting at me in person. Such a shallow, psychologically limited and utterly pathetic attack is to be expected of course, given all your postings thus far.

Raging Bee, I do not know who Dr. Davidson is, or the entirety of his reasons for leaving. However, many scientists who openy question Darwin are attacked and castigated in the most shocking and unscholarly fashion by their colleagues. Voices of dissention are often hounded out of their jobs and banished to the outer fringes of science where it is virtually impossible for them to make a living. But the relentless myth of Darwinism prevails.

Yours Sincerely,

William J. Gibbons

Yeah, people who refuse to face reality tend to lose their jobs and their friends as a result. But this has nothing to do with the Davidson story, which can be found here:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002450329_danny24.html

Of course, if you only read material approved by the Discovery Institute, you won't have heard of this, which is why peer review and freedom of the press are so useful, right?

Read the story and stop trying to dodge the issue.

Bee, you'll get no substantive answer, because Gibbons has none to provide. He's not interested in science. Indeed, he and his "intellectual" kin build their careers by being blatantly anti-science.

Mr Gibbons:

Perhaps if you presented credible evidence that supports your view of "natural history", instead of dodging the issue by whining and crying about foul language, it might enhance your credibility.

Well, since you don't let facts get in the way of your dogma, what else are you willing to ignore? The germ theory of disease perhaps? After all, in the good old days people would get sick as a result of God's wrath, not "germs".

Or perhaps the entire science of meteorology? After all, it does not invoke God (therefore it's atheistic and materialistic). Perhaps Ben Franklin should be reviled along with Darwin. After all, it was Franklin who showed that lightning was electricity, and not the hand of God.

Greetings All,

My sincere apologise for not replying sooner, but work commitments, travel plans and book projects have all kept me rather busy.

As a matter of fact, my exchange with Ed Brayton (and on this website) has attracted some interesting attention. Firstly, I am about to sign a deal with a documentary production company who will be filming my next expedition to Cameroon/Congo in search of Mokele-mbembe for the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company). Secondly, Coachwhip Publications have signed me up as a new author with three new book projects on the go, including one which will cover the creation/evolution question. Thirdly, I will be giving a two hour radio interview on creation/evolution on AM 640 Mojo radio on Octobr 28th. As it is a live phone in show, please feel free to call. See http://www.richardsyrett.com/index.htm

Frankly, I couldn't buy publicity like this and I have you all to thank.

Now, it's back to my fifth reply to Ed Brayton, whom I also owe a debt of thanks!

Keep up the good work everyone.

With my personal Best Wishes To You All,

William J. Gibbons

Greetings All,

My sincere apologise for not replying sooner, but work commitments, travel plans and book projects have all kept me rather busy.

As a matter of fact, my exchange with Ed Brayton (and on this website) has attracted some interesting attention. Firstly, I am about to sign a deal with a documentary production company who will be filming my next expedition to Equatorial Africa in search of Mokele-mbembe for the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company). Secondly, Coachwhip Publications have signed me up as a new author with three new book projects on the go, including one which will cover the creation/evolution question. Thirdly, I will be giving a two hour radio interview on creation/evolution on AM 640 Mojo radio on Octobr 28th. As it is a live phone in show, please feel free to call. See http://www.richardsyrett.com/index.htm

Frankly, I couldn't buy publicity like this and I have you all to thank.

Now, it's back to my fifth reply to Ed Brayton, whom I also owe a debt of thanks!

With my personal Best Wishes To You All,

William J. Gibbons