There is a peculiar intellectual paralysis that often sets in when someone speaks with an air of academic authority and is introduced as having a doctorate after their name. Arguments that would, in other contexts, be immediately recognized as plainly absurd if uttered by an anonymous skeptic on the internet, suddenly become “serious scholarship” upon being delivered by someone with a formal credential.
One of the most powerful tools in persuasion, irrespective of the credibility of what you are saying, is confidence. Assertions delivered with certainty and rhetorical force can often sound very convincing to an untrained audience. For the uninitiated, confidence is very easily, and subconsciously, taken as a proxy for competence.
Careful scholarly critique is often very valuable in helping one to refine and better nuance arguments and discover potential vulnerabilities. In the present case, however, the attempted rebuttals offered by John Nelson illuminate the robustness of the arguments rather than their weaknesses.
