[Virginia-American]

RE: Scientists refuse to debate CRIDers.

There are several things going on here:

1) CRIDers often throw out a whole pamphlets' worth of what they perceive (or pretend to perceive, because, deep down, I suspect they know they're lying) to be unanswerable objections to standard biology, geology, physics, etc etc.

It is impossible for the normal person to respond to all of these in the time allocated.

2) The converse of this is, that CRIDers *will not* debate on-line. Their sound-bite logic doesn't work when the other side has time to research, as opposed to trying to remember everything on their feet in front of an often hostile audience.

I'm pinging RWP because IIRC he wanted an on-line debate. With Johnson (?)

[VadeRetro]

RE: Scientists refuse to debate CRIDers.

There's also a Catch-22 game there. Any scientist who regularly debates ID, or any entity actually organized to do so (the NCSE website or TalkOrigins) is routinely rejected on these threads as an anti-creationist witch-hunter and a "better" source will be demanded.

So, duck them and you're accused of a conspiracy to ignore them away. Answer them and you're a rabid partisan incapable of objectivity.

[Right Wing Professor]

I'll debate any of them, online or in person, at any time. I can do sound bites; I have no problem returning personal attacks in kind; and a quarter century of teaching has trained me to think on my feet. Nothing focusses the mind like discovering you have a sign error in your notes and you have to finish a complicated proof on the fly in front of 50 wise-ass chemical engineers who will pick up instantly on any mistake.