Talk:Essay: New Atheist Kyle Kulinski defeated

The Oxford University Professor Daniel Came wrote to the New Atheist Richard Dawkins:: "The absence of a debate with the foremost apologist for Christian theism is a glaring omission on your CV and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part."

Kulinski admires Richard Dawkins because he admires cowards and cowardice! Kulinski predictably ran away from Conservapedia's atheism vs. Christianity debate offer.

Don't you think it would be better to let a 3rd party judge the result? Judging yourself is hardly unbiased. He took on all your points and answered them albeit in an uncouth manner, in fact he spent the best part of half an hour doing so and you come back with the exact same points you posted in your first debate essay. It is only a matter of time before he finds out about the $20000 fiasco and he will tear you to shreds about it forcing you to delete and over-site both essays in their entirety. You have proven you have a knowledgeable and at times insightful brain but I suggest you think before engaging it's gears.--ColeP (talk) 10:46, 14 September 2015 (EDT)

ColeP, Kulinski addressed all the points and answered them? There must be a reason why you are being so vague about your claim? What is it? Was Kulinski's latest video rebutted in this essay? If not, why?

Do you deny that Kyle Kulinski refused our atheism vs. Christianity debate offer? Are you denying that Kyle Kulinski admires Richard Dawkins - a known coward? Conservative (talk) 10:51, 14 September 2015 (EDT)

I do not have time to do an in-depth critique right now but I will come back to you on that later, If I am not blocked in the meantime. The point you just made about Dawkins, that is called ad hominem, IE it has nothing to do with the argument. I can engage in ad hominem also. Do you admire Vox Day, a known racist and misogynist?--ColeP (talk) 11:00, 14 September 2015 (EDT)