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 Member at nontrivialpodcast.com or patreon.com/8431143/join
Premium members get access to the full member app. This includes data visualizations of the core concepts in each episode, a Study Space for learning fundamentals, and premium articles on Techniques and Mindsets.
Members can also save personal notes, explore episode summaries and transcripts, search across episodes, track watch history and progress, and participate in the community forum. Premium membership includes ongoing support.
