This video follows up the exchange between physicist and author Lawrence Krauss and christian apologist William Lane Craig, which took place at Brisbane's City Hall on August 7, 2013.
During his introductory speech, Krauss candidly exposed a number of falsehoods and besmirchments recently propagated by Craig in response to the upcoming film, The Unbelievers. The film (scheduled for release later this year) follows famed scientists Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss as they travel the world promoting science and reason.
Following the event, Craig offered an "apology" on his Facebook page, in which he denied any wrong-doing but, instead, proclaimed it all a big misunderstanding.
This video documents the lies and misrepresentations made by Craig, as well as corresponding video footage pertaining to the comments in question.
Full text of WLC's apology:
After a very full day at a Pastor's Conference yesterday in Adelaide, Jan and I finally have a bit of a break. This gives me a chance to address one of the personal charges that Krauss issued in his opening speech of the Brisbane event.
It concerns a mistake which I had already realized and corrected some time ago. When Kevin Harris and I recorded our podcasts reviewing the movie "The Unbelievers," we worked off an audio recording someone had made of the movie. So we could not see who was actually speaking. I mistook who was speaking in an exchange between Richard Dawkins and Cardinal Pell and so misinterpreted the exchange. When we became aware of the mistake, we immediately corrected the podcast so that the misattribution was no longer made. However, Krauss obtained a copy of the initial uncorrected podcast during the few days it was public and played it during his opening speech, followed by the clip from the movie showing what had actually taken place. He construed this as deliberate misrepresentation and distortion on my part, thereby impugning my character.
The mistake was mine, and I regret it. It was, however, an honest mistake, self-corrected as soon as we became aware of it. It was not deliberate misrepresentation or distortion as Prof. Krauss charged. I explained this to him personally after the Dialogue, but he remained unmollified. It will be interesting to see if he brings it up in the Sydney Dialogue.