8
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − '''Historical revisionism''' involves either the illegitimate distortion of the historical record or a careful and more objective re-examination of the historical data about a historical event or events. + − Those who engage in denialism often pose as historical revisionists in order to cloak their motivations. A term for engaging in denialism when reporting false histories is the term historical negationism. For example, [[Holocaust]] deniers engage in historical negationism. + − == Atheism and illegitimate historical revisionism ==+ + − Atheists commonly engage in historical revisionism in order to illegitimately distort the historical record (see: [[Atheism and historical revisionism]]).+ − == See also ==+ − *[[Richard Dawkins, atheist atrocities, and historical revisionism]]+ − [[Category: History]]+ + + +
Historical revisionism (view source)
Revision as of 18:22, November 23, 2015
, 18:22, November 23, 2015Essay: About a debate challenge to an atheist I extended debate offers to the atheists/agnostics Penn Jillette and Kyle Kulinski and predictably they cowardly declined (see: Conservapedia's challenge to atheist Penn Jillette and Debate challenge to new a
Essay: About a debate challenge to an atheist
I extended debate offers to the atheists/agnostics Penn Jillette and Kyle Kulinski and predictably they cowardly declined (see: Conservapedia's challenge to atheist Penn Jillette and Debate challenge to new atheist Kyle Kulinski and New Atheist Kyle Kulinski defeated).
Atheists/agnostics displaying cowardice in relation to debate offers is certainly nothing new (see: Atheism and cowardice).
About a contributor to an atheist website and his failure to meet my debate offer
An atheist website is engaging in historical revisionism about a debate challenge which was issued to them. Of course, this is not surprising given the degree to which atheists have engaged in historical revisionism (see: Atheism and historical revisionism).
First of all, for the record and setting aside atheist claims to the contrary, I have never made the claim that I am a skilled debater. I have repeatedly stated that debates against atheists are very easily won due to the inherent weakness of atheism (see: Rebuttals to atheist arguments and Atheism and debate). Accordingly, consistently winning in exchanges with atheists is not a significant achievement.
Second, a contributor of an atheist website (which is still not notable to have a Wikipedia article about it) never properly accepted my debate offer. The debate offer required the obscure atheist who contributes to the atheist website (A website which is often obsessed with Conservapedia and the User: Conservative account) to make a donation to a Christian relief organization. And I required the donation to a Christian relief organization be held by a trustworthy party/organization. An offer of having a relative of the atheist, who falsely claimed to accept my debate offer, holding the funds certainly did not meet this criteria.
Are the atheists who contribute to this atheist website so desperate for a victory that they feel they have to manufacture a faux victory? I realize that they are frustrated that they cannot find a single factual error in the Conservapedia atheism article, but this pathetic attempt at historical revisionism clearly shows that they lack machismo!
Category:
Essays