Monday, February 09, 2004

On Debating Creation...

My posts on the upcoming book by Hugh Ross & Fuz Rana, Origins of Life: Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off, generated a mini-debate between myself and Ed the Evolutionist over at Dispatches from the Culture Wars (actually, another couple of debaters joined the fray - PZ and DS). I had been hoping for a good dialogue between Ed and Co., and it did start out that way but then fell apart mostly, in my opinion, due to mutual misunderstandings. I really shouldn't be surprised at the outcome since I've seen it before in debates between other Creationists and Evolutionists. Still, it's too bad, because the gist of Ed's initial question is valid - How do you posit a Scientifically Testable Creation Model? I hope that in the near future Reasons to Believe will garner the resources to clarify specific testable predictions that their model makes. If we can address specific predictions then we can possibly get around the tap dancing, false accusations, and obstinacy that prevailed in my recent discussion. As point of fact: I was accused of avoiding one question in particular and, thereby, being dishonest and disingenuous; in fact I answered their question in detail - just not to their liking. I was accused not only of not accepting evidence presented but that I would, in fact, not accept any evidence they may happen to provide; well let's be clear here - evidence is evidence - I accepted their evidence as evidence. What they don't seem to understand is that some evidence may be disputable, some evidence may be scant, and some evidence may be interpreted in multiple ways. As to what I may or may not do in the future with some evidence they may provide me? - well, provide it and we'll see what happens. That, after all, is the answer I gave them that they refused to accept. I was continually asked for specific, falsifiable predictions from the Creation Model and when they weren't satisfied with what I gave them, I then referred them to the scientists responsible for developing the Creation Model; the sounds of silence were all I heard on that account. One wonders what they're afraid of? For an excellent guide on the line of attacks that go on during a debate with skeptics, read Ed's posts for yourselves: A testable creation model - does it exist?, then Testable Creation Model part 2, then Reply to Rusty on Testable Creation Model, then Final Response to Rusty on Testable Creation Model, then Response to Rusty's comments below, then Continued Responses to Rusty, then Two questions for Rusty, then Final note on transitional forms, and finally the Rusty Saga continues. Be sure to check out the comment's sections as well.

No comments: