"What Are Evolutionists So Afraid Of?"

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The reason why evolutionists are denying debate requests from creationists is not because they're afraid from loosing, but because they're tired of hearing the same terrible arguments again and again, like, putting a straw man on evolution by confusing it with abiogenesis. Even if they somehow manage to disprove biological evolution, how are they going to convince any scientist to trust their "only true ultimate standard"?

Actually, biologists (I really dislike the term 'evolutionist') tend not to want to debate creationists on stage, because of the very real fear of them (the biologists) losing the debate. The way formal debates are structured tends to favour idiocy over science.

Suppose the creationist steps up to the podium and makes the following statement: 'Evolution cannot be true because of the complexity of the human eye, the feeding habits of woodpeckers, and the hoax of the Piltdown Man. I yield the balance of my time.'

The moderator turns to the biologist and says, 'Your reply, please. Under the rules, you have five minutes.'

And THAT'S where the problem is. The non-issues raised by the creationists simply cannot be meaningfully answered in five minutes - it isn't possible. The creationist knows this - he's counting on it. All these science hating, ignorant cretins have to do is make some moronic, bald-faced assertions like those above, any one of which takes a lot longer than five minutes to answer, and he's certain sure to win the debate - they don't care about science, they care about the perception that the scientist droned on and on and never refuted the assertion in the time allotted.

What biologists would prefer to do is to have on-line debates with these knuckle-draggers, with remarks/responses limited by word count, not by time. Creationists run from THESE challenges like a timid virgin from an orgy, since they know they'll be skewered.

Boru