i should also point out this fundamental principle: it doesn't matter if bishop is a troll. nobody who survives past about 100 posts actually believes they are going to change anyone's mind. or if they ever did believe that, they quickly come around. the only people who last past 100 are just here to debate for the sake of debate. and in that case it doesn't matter what anyone *actually* believes, only the position(s) they take.
just look at devito. at worst, he doesn't have anything better to do but appear clever, nitpick semantics, and argue against his own convictions. at best, he is shrewdly and admirably keeping his mind sharp. (probably somewhere in the middle but either way, his brain wins, and i for one could learn something from it.)
and actually, bishop isn't technically a "troll" anyway. he doesn't stir up arbitrary conflict for juvenile self-indulgent kicks. he methodically argues a very narrow, very disciplined, completely absurd, and "apparently" dogmatic view of the world. he is rigorously self-disciplined in the way he relies on rowbotham and *only* rowbotham for his defense, his staunch refusal to concede a single flawed point no matter how trivial, and his inability to observe basic principles of sanity and reason. it's pure genius, really. (either that, or he's a fantastically, impossibly ignorant fundie jackass [in spite of claiming atheism].)
calling him a "troll" is inaccurate and unfairly dismissive of his accomplishments.
edit: fixed strikethrough over half the text