[troutman]

Why Bill Nye the Science Guy is trying to reason with America's creationists

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...e-creationists

Nye has been criticized for agreeing to this debate. What Nye is doing gives creationists "the oxygen of respectability in the world of real science", according to Richard Dawkins. Ham is relishing the opportunity to misinform the public and pretend that real scientists take his work seriously.

Unfortunately, with or without the Nye debate, much of the American population already sees creationism as a scientifically valid alternative to evolution. There isn't a single legitimate research lab in the country studying biblical creation or Noah's flood, but creationism is still influencing public policy and is still being taught in public school science classes.

According to Gallup, nearly half of the country rejects evolution. Forty-Six percent of Americans believe humans were created in their present form, by God, in the last 10,000 years. Over the past 30 years, belief in creationism has remained relatively stable, despite creationism's repeated court losses.

That's why Nye agreed to this debate, he wants to raise awareness that "this belief [in creationism] is still among us" and it is a political issue that cannot be ignored. Creationism still "finds its way onto school boards in the United States".

In September, I heard Nye speak and he explained that he had spoken out because he had a moral responsibility to oppose the teaching of creationism. He's said creationism is "completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe" and miseducating a generation of students by teaching creationism will harm our country because "we need scientifically literate voters and tax payers for the future".

Nye is doing his part by raising awareness of the issue, but as citizens, we all have a moral responsibility to speak out and make sure the next generation of students is scientifically literate. We can do that by fighting back against policy that would allow creationism into public school science classes.

Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham: Should scientists bother debating creationists?

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/201...tionists-video

Anthropologist and science blogger Greg Laden agrees.

"I think Bill Nye is great, but I think he’s making a mistake," Dr. Laden writes in his blog. "First, Bill Nye is not really an expert on evolution and is actually not that experienced in debates. Being really really pro science and science education isn’t enough."

Bill Nye wastes his time debating creationists

http://www.suntimes.com/news/othervi...ationists.html

The irony of debates like the one between Bill Nye and Ken Ham is that they pit two fundamentalist readers against each other. The fundamentalist Christian and the atheist both read the Bible as a series of falsifiable propositions — what Terry Eagleton calls the “Yeti” theory of belief. Disproving the creation narrative should strike any theologian as absurd — the way a literature professor would react if a student claimed to have “disproven” “Sons and Lovers.”

Bill Nye is intensely concerned about climate change and evolution, as are we. He should therefore ally himself with sane religious leaders, rather than debate fundamentalists.