[Jabba the Nutt]

Actually, this makes it seem that the scientists are afraid to debate, that they have something to hide. Yes, there are wacko creationists out there and yes, there are dogmatic evolutionists out there.

[mlc9852]

No matter whether scientists debate or not, I doubt anyone's mind will be changed. Evolution vs. creationism is a stalemate.

[Drew68]

Actually, this makes it seem that the scientists are afraid to debate, that they have something to hide.

Not at all. Scientists simply do not find creationism worthy of debate. By attending, they would be supporting the idea that creationism is "debatable" and thus a legitimate alternative theory. No reputable scientists supports creationism.

It would as if respected historians attended a debate with Holocaust deniers or geologists debated with people who believe the earth is flat. By debating with these people, one gives their ideas a legitimacy that they do not deserve.

[finnigan2]

"Actually, this makes it seem that the scientists are afraid to debate, that they have something to hide."

- Actually, I think they steered clear of the hearings to avoid embarrassing questions which they can't answer. Ever since science has begun to gain an increased understanding of DNA and how it governs a species traits, the keystone to the theory of evolution, that of "natural selection" is appearing more and more glaringly inadequate.
No longer can it be argued that worms turn into snakes because of climate change or "survival of the fittest" or any of the other evolutionary theory supporter's smug nostrums.
There's something more at play here and frankly, they haven't got a clue what it is. Until they come up with Evolutionary Theory Mark II, you won't see these scientists at too many hearings.