WHO WON?
Full disclosure: I did not watch last night's highly publicized debate between young earth creationist Ken Ham and TV's "Science Guy" Bill Nye. I don't know who won the debate. I know that partisans on both sides of the question are claiming some measure of victory. I also know that it doesn't matter.
You see, the winner in a debate is not necessarily the one who has the truth on their side. It is the one who is more skilled at debating.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
This is precisely why I am not a fan of debates. The format encourages participants to just make things up, because appearing confident and well-versed in factoids looks a whole lot more showmansy than actually trying to give carefully-considered and accurate responses.
ReplyDeleteI didn't watch it either. I've heard people say that Nye did a good job of trying to educate his audience and that, as a science popularizer, he was really the perfect person for the debate. But I think it's a bit meaningless to ask who won.
Frankly, the reason I didn't watch the debate is that my blood pressure is high enough. I don't need to subject myself to Ken Ham's brand of horse hockey. I'm sure that he is sincere in his beliefs but he has neither the weight of fact nor sound biblical interpretation on his side. I have seen videos of him telling young children about the supposed evils of evolutionary theory. The only word that comes to mind is "indoctrination." The worst aspect of his message is that he makes a false dichotomy between science and religion.
DeleteAnd people believe him.
Well, I suppose that the dichotomy is real if one accepts Ham's definition of religion.
I have read reviews of the debate that say Nye comported himself well. That doesn't surprise me in the least. He is a smart man and an able communicator.
I might have been more interested in the debate if it had revolved around questions of biblical interpretation but, hey, that's where my interests lie.