This caught my eye;
. . .consistent materialism can easily be shown to be completely unable to explain the very acts of rational discourse and logical argumentation. The very manner in which they go about their business - assuming before they begin in the reality of consciousness, minds and rationality - refutes them.
So "assuming" that we really are conscious, we really do have minds and that rationality is real refutes doubt in the existence of god does it? How exactly does it do that?
Hang on, these three "assumptions" ring a bell . . .
Oh yes they are the first three issues Psychologists consider when wondering whether or not to certify someone in a mental hospital. Anyone who does not agree that all three are real gets certified straight away. Keep your head down David!
And what's with the "assume" bit, we have the whole history of human experience let alone scientific endeavour to back up this "assumption".
I wonder what Anderson could have to compete with that;
Turning this around, we have a solid proof for the reality of God who has made us in his image, the so-called "transcendental argument" - because if you assume anything to the contrary, you have no basis on which to prove anything else at all.
Of course this has all the circular logic of the mobius strip. It is a classic example of the logical fallacy called begging the question, because you must assume that his answer (we are made in god's image) is correct as part of the question (is there a god?).
Leaving that aside he falls back on his old favourite fallacy - the argument from ignorance - because he can't think of a way to prove the reality of consciousness, minds and rationality, on a piece of paper then by default he shoehorns his particular version of god into the gap.
Noah's Ark, the Flintstones as a documentary et al.
Now that is quality irrationality for you - I needed a laugh after thinking about those kids in Africa being killed as witches because of some idiot's interpretation of the bible as literal truth and the issue of JW's dying for lack of blood because of some idiot's interpretation of the bible as literal truth and I really needed a change of subject. . .