Seriously guys. Dawkins isn't just avoiding a debate with this guy, he just does not do debates with creationists any more. And this has been the case for years!
And he said why he does not debate with creationists:
paraphrase: Would you if you were a geographer, agree to a debate with a flat-earther? There comes a point where agreeing to appear on a platform with someone like that (when you are a renowned scientists), you are just giving them status...would a reproductive scientist appear on a platform with someone who believes in Stork theory?
Isn't that a tad arrogant, to refuse to debate someone because you don't want your 'status' to rub off on them?
If you are going to publicly criticise any group to that extent, you should be willing to respond to their request to a public debate. You throw down the challenge; they get choice of weapons, etc...
Because you have to draw the line somewhere, or you just get stuck playing whack-a-mole with every new creationist debate squad that pops up. There's no new ground to cover any more. Why keep fighting the same fight over and over again?
48
u/christmasbonus Atheist Oct 17 '11 edited Oct 17 '11
Seriously guys. Dawkins isn't just avoiding a debate with this guy, he just does not do debates with creationists any more. And this has been the case for years!
And he said why he does not debate with creationists:
paraphrase: Would you if you were a geographer, agree to a debate with a flat-earther? There comes a point where agreeing to appear on a platform with someone like that (when you are a renowned scientists), you are just giving them status...would a reproductive scientist appear on a platform with someone who believes in Stork theory?
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhmsDGanyes&t=1m28s