Bring it, Cosmos

Cosmos is prepared to debate one he describes as a simpleton:

It should be clear by now that I’m willing to debate any issue you choose to raise on your blog. I’m just waiting for something of substance and wondering if you have something of substance to offer rather than the lifeless claims you offer up to support the simple views of atheists that you can’t seem to get beyond.

But I do have faith you’ll keep trying, just no expectation you’ll actually step up.

Well, at least we both agree that the views of Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris are simple. But interestingly enough, Cosmos also sees a connection between VTU shooter Cho and Christianity that I truly don’t:

I guess we can expect to see christians adopted a picture of Cho as their symbol.

Perfect, there’s our subject for debate right there. You have the position that Cho is a reasonable symbol for Christians, I shall oppose it. You may proceed with the first argument, if it’s too long to easily post here in the comments then simply email it to me and I shall post it here in its unedited entirety.

And then I shall respond to it.

UPDATE: Unsurprisingly, Cosmos backs down, claiming that he was only being sarcastic, implying therefore that his statement about the connection between Cho and Christianity should not be taken seriously. (Never mind that others are raising precisely the same point based on the Christianity of most Korean immigrants and the religious faith of Cho’s mother.) Of course, this also contradicts his previous statement that he was willing to debate “any issue”.

This should demonstrate to everyone’s satisfaction that Cosmos is simply yet another loudmouth lightweight with an excess of bark and a dearth of bite. I note that I offered him his choice of subjects, which he declined, then suggested a subject which he himself had brought up, which then he again declined. Let him be henceforth known as “Michelle” in honor of another famous master debater.

Anyhow, perhaps someone else would prefer to debate me on a subject of rather more interest to me, which is my notion that the current debate between Christianity and the “new” atheism is a logical extension of the trans-Channel hostility between the Newtonian and Leibnizian calculus camps.