Recently, the "new" atheists have been putting out books, articles, bus ads, and TV programs in attempts to sway people to their cause. Through these tactics they've managed to gain a large amount of public attention and media exposure--but do their arguments really hold water?
Using the analogy put forward by esteemed philosopher Anthony Flew, Michael Poole examines the new atheists' use of the "10 leaky buckets" tactic of argumentation--presenting readers with a sum of arguments that are each individually defective, as though the cumulative effect should be persuasive. This closer look at the facts reveals that the buckets are, indeed, leaky.
