Not a Kung-fu flick

This stuff is golden: http://wayofthemaster.com/

I'm currently watching the 'debunking' of evolution by Kirk Cameron and his pal Ray Comfort. The kinds of things they do to disprove evolution:

1. Ask college students about where we came from. Point out in writing every time they say "I don't know".
2. Tell us that the only proof of evolution is in the fossil record. Which is not correct. And then point out how inadequate it is. Which is correct. But then forget to mention all the other bits of evidence.
3. Get a chimp on set. Get really upset when the chimp misbehaves. Tell us that this is proof that we could not have shared a common ancestor.
4. Suggest that the reason that chimps and humans 'look' similar is not because of shared ancestry, but because God was our common designer, as if that's easier to accept. Why then, do humans and birds look so different? Because we had different designers?
5. Go back to asking people on the street about evolution. Bask in their inability to answer.
6. Make sure to put finger "quotes" around "fossil" when saying "fossil record".

There's much more good stuff - there's one for atheism, too. "It's funny that we equate the word atheism with intellectual, but it's the exact opposite". Gee, thanks, that's really going to convert me.

The problem (depending on what you believe, of course) with this stuff is that it's so slick, so well produced, that it's very easy to buy into, if you don't know about the larger body of evidence, or if you have never had any formal education on the subject. What if they represented both sides of the argument..?

Here's a bit of fun:

And here's Jeffrey Rowland's response in cartoon format.