Evolutionists don't accept debate challenges
From EvoWiki
Contents |
Claim
Evolutionists are unwilling to debate creationists.
Source
- Brown, Walt, n.d., Center for Scientific Creation, [1].
Responses
- This claim is patently false. There are many documented examples of scientists debating creationists.
- Scientists generally see public debates as exercises in publicity rather than actual discussion and argument. Many scientists are quite happy, willing, and capable of carrying out lengthy debates in print, but creationists are generally only interested in events that are quick and TV media or audience-friendly, which further illuminates their motives for demanding debates.
- Scientists often refuse to debate creationists in person because the "debates" frequently are not held on a level playing field, are of too short a duration to cover the necessary ground, and are far too shallow to hold any scientific significance.
- Creationists can simply raise many questions that would take the scientist more than the allotted time to properly answer (and the answer would be at a level above the layperson's education level in biology) because it is far easier to make allegations than it is to respond to them, even if the allegations are extremely silly, and certainly if they are subtly misleading.
- When debates do occur between evolutionists and creationists, the creationists often use semantic tactics and emotional appeals, rather than scientific evidence, in order to insult the intelligence or motives of their opponents (or even insult their opponents directly). The repeated use of these tactics has convinced many scientists that such debates are not honest and are a waste of time.
- This very site is debating claims as well as countless other resources available, including creationists rejecting the arguments of other creationists. Claiming that scientists have no answers to creationist questions just because they won't appear on daytime talkshows or cable shouting matches is simply absurd.
- So, why is refusing to debate with a group that has a well-earned reputation for dishonesty and using dirty tricks considered a weakness?
- add more responses
Fallacies contained in this claim
- Exclusion (claimant ignores debates that have happened)
- Appeal to Pity (those poor creationists are ignored by scientists)
- Argument from Omniscience (obviously)
External Links
- Debates, Gatherings & Court Decisions, [2]
- Astronomer Phil Plait explains why he does not debate pseudoscientists, [3]
Related claims
- Scientists are pressured not to challenge established dogma
- Creationists are prevented from publishing in science journals
- Evolutionists haven't met Hovind's challenge to prove evolution
- Evolutionists don't accept Walt Brown's debate challenge
