# Michael Shermer on WHI



## Marrow Man (May 24, 2011)

If anyone has not listened to the most recent edition of the White Horse Inn (here), I would encourage you to do so. Michael Horton interviews well-known skeptic Michael Shermer. The interview is very enlightening in revealing many of the problems with an unbelieving naturalistic worldview.

I was somewhat surprised, considering how bright Shermer is, how poorly reasoned his worldview actually is. He made several logical fallacies (and Horton called him on most of them). He has a poor understanding of Christianity and makes a very careless error about Islam. He favors a multiple universe theory (even though he admits there is absolutely no way to prove it) as a basis for his worldview. Truly it is a great example of suppressing the knowledge of God in unrighteousness.

Next week Horton will be talking with Greg Koukl about the interview.


----------



## Rufus (May 24, 2011)

I liked it, but I don't think Horton did great, but than again Shermer did worse (as you said the basis of his worldview, etc.). I thought Shermers reasons for becoming an agnostic where lame.


----------



## Marrow Man (May 24, 2011)

Sean, I would agree with that. Horton is not very confrontational on these sorts of things, but I thought he did a decent job calling Shermer out for appeals to emotion, ad populum etc. He should have pounced more on the Osiris resurrection comment. I can only imagine how a skilled debater like James White would have done. I can't wait to hear the rest of Greg Koukl's comments next week.


----------



## Rufus (May 24, 2011)

Marrow Man said:


> He should have pounced more on the Osiris resurrection comment.



I actually was expecting Horton to use that as an opportunity.


----------



## James Swan (May 24, 2011)

Marrow Man said:


> Sean, I would agree with that. Horton is not very confrontational on these sorts of things,



I haven't heard this yet, but I recall being very disappointed by Horton's interview with Robert Sungenis. Perhaps his lack of confrontation is why enemies of the faith agree to be interviewed by him.


----------



## CubsIn07 (Jun 2, 2011)

I thought Horton did a good job. At no point did Shermer win a single point. In fact he looked bad even though Horton went relatively easy on him. Koukl was even better the next week.


----------



## kodos (Jun 2, 2011)

I wondered if there was an agreement between the parties that it wouldn't be too hostile, since it came across as a book promotion. But Shermer's arguments were incredulously poor.


----------

