Darwin lobby offers five reasons scientists should …

Evolution thumpers should not debate because They will lose. They can't win for losing. When one is wrong one loses. Debates bring out competent or almost(it doesn't matter) creationists and this means one will lose. Avoiding debates leaves the contention in segregated circles. evolutionists in schools and creationists in grassroots audiences . no reason to debate as the great debate drew 5 and more million people and evolutionism is in a state despair about it. next time get your facts and evidence and general intellectual ability in order before drawing desirable conclusions. Email this to any remaining evolutionists please. Robert Byers

From reason #5: "A survey conducted in 2007 revealed the dismal fact that one in eight public high-school biology teachers in the United States already present creationism as scientifically credible, and that six in 10 already downplay evolution." Sounds to me like Ann Reid, the director of a center ostensibly credited with defending and promoting science education, isn't doing her job properly. If so many teachers are downplaying a theory that has "incontrovertible" evidence and are promoting a religious ideology, then either (a) the teachers are bringing religion into the classroom in promoting creationism; (b) the teachers don't care what the students believe, or (c) evolution doesn't have the rock-solid evidence that scientists would like you to believe it has. Barb

@Seqenere: I think that a debate on any of those topics is useful, because regardless of whether you change your opponents mind it will show the audience how weak your opponents position is. Why not debate an "easy" topic? It makes it an easy victory for you! sixthbook

How about not debating those who think that living organisms arose via happenstance chemical interactions. Those who think that genetic accidents can accumulate in such a way as to give rise to new multi-protein machinery. But I digress, that is why they don't want to debate us. As if someone can scientifically support materialism and evolutionism. Joe

In general, one should not debate the following science deniers: 1. Those who think the earth is not older than 6000 years. 2. Those who believe the sun revolves around the earth. 3. Those who think Neil Armstrong and colleagues never went to the moon. 4. Those who deny the Holocaust. 5. Those who believe monuments of the historic and archeological past were build by alien visitors from space and not by our ancestors. Feel free to suggest other groups. Seqenenre

From the article: "By all means, confront creationism, but do so in ways that advance, rather than hinder, the goal of a scientifically literate public that supports the teaching of evolution." This usually means silence them, not engage them in discussion. Obviously, "The Scientist" sees creationism vs. evolutionism as two quite opposite world views. Jeff Brown

#7 It makes Hitler unhappy, and Eugenie cry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjKhuEp074U Robert Sheldon