In 2014 there was a debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham regarding whether or not Creationism is a viable explanation for earth's origin. Regardless of which side you agree with, there was what I consider a problematic response from some of the scientific community, which was that the debate never should have happened, because it gave a voice to something counter to the scientific consensus. I argue that such a response is antithetical to science itself, which, above all, is supposed to be a process that welcomes debate and updates its position as needed. I argue that no matter how wrong you believe your opponent to be, public debate and conversation gives us a chance to point out fallacies, educate the public and bring us all closer to the truth.
Become a premium member to gain access to premium content, including the Techniques and Mindsets Videos, visual concept summaries of each episode, community forum, episode summary notes, episode transcripts, q&a/ama sessions, episode search, watch history, watch progress and support.
Join Now at nontrivialpodcast.com or patreon.com/8431143/join
