PZ Myers, one of the “New Atheists” (just like the old ones except rude and lacking reasoning skills) plays the same tricks that Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and others do. Richard Dawkins went on the radio show of Hugh Hewitt, who Myers considers to be a “far right radio wingnut” and a “ridiculous puffed-up blowhard of very little brain.” What a charming fellow this Myers chap is! With winsome, well thought out arguments like that you have to know his scientific facts must be right as well.
The main point of Myers’ post was to re-hash the classic double-play fallacy used by many atheists. It hinges on the way they use the argument against miracles as synonymous with the argument against God.
They pretend to be proving that God doesn’t exist, then they assume it and act shocked — shocked, I say! — that people of faith believe in miracles. Then they dismiss the believers as idiots (just read as much of Myer’s comment thread as you can stomach) and act as if nothing they say can be believed. See how Dawkins tries to play the game:
Richard Dawkins: Okay, do you believe Jesus turned water into wine?
Hugh Hewitt: Yes.
RD: You seriously do?
RD: You actually think that Jesus got water, and made all those molecules turn into wine?
RD: My God.
HH: Yes. My God, actually, not yours. But let me…
RD: I’ve realized the kind of person I’m dealing with now.
Note what Dawkins did: He assumed what he should be proving — namely, that God doesn’t exist. And he turned it into a personal attack as well. In addition, he probably lied, because unless he is a complete moron he already knew what Hewitt’s beliefs were. My guess is that he pretended to just figure it out.
So Dawkins’ fallacies were carefully choreographed to demonize his ideological opponent and to pretend that he’d already proved that there is no God. And Myers and his gang eat it up as if Dawkins actually accomplished something. Aren’t they bright!
If they really think that this trick proves anything then they are as foolish as they claim Hewitt and other believers are. If they know how ridiculous their arguments are yet they use them anyway then that demonstrates their lack of character.