There is a scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail where King Arthur comes across a knight guarding a path. The knight refuses to allow anyone to pass unless they first defeat him in single combat. Arthur accepts the challenge and cuts off the knight's arm. "Tis but a flesh wound!" the knight cries and insists that the battle continues. He refuses to accept defeat even after all his limbs have been hacked off. Arthur wonders off bemused as the knight slithers behind him trying to bite his ankles.
Arguing on the internet is often like this, especially when dealing with Jesus Mythers and other conspiracy theorists. One of the prime exponents on the Internet Infidels' board even claims to have a PhD in philosophy. No matter how often you point out his enormous errors, he keeps coming declaring that anything he doesn't like is a fraud or an interpolation added by Eusebius.
I should not be surprised that A.C. Grayling is behaving in the same way. Despite being shot down countless times, he continues to insist that he is right that Christianity has made not a single contribution to science. The Guardian wisely closes all threads after three days, but Grayling has promptly opened a new one where people can pile on his agony. I cannot understand why a well known and respected academic is trying to besmirch his own reputation like this.
Comments or questions? Post them at Bede's dedicated yahoo group.