Comments on: Who should moderate a Science Debate?

By: Achrachno

Achrachno — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:31:36 +0000

“who would be the best moderator?”

Someone good at dragging people back to topics they’re trying to avoid and better at calling BS when that is being shoveled. Being able to control attempted Gish gallops would also be a big plus. A strong personality (but not abrasive), good science background and quick wit are needed.

I don’t know exactly who has these skills.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:30:30 +0000

I agree that debates over science where one component is an anti-science stance (and I’ve done that with creationists, serving my time) are hogs on ice. (Though I quickly add, in the part of the country where I grew up, they shoed the hogs with tiny little hog shoes so they did OK on ice.)

By: Mike Pollard

Mike Pollard — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 01:55:32 +0000

I’m also not convinced that science should be debated in a public forum. The likes of Monckton are a very clear example that an experienced debater can say just about anything and get away with it on the night. While the cleanup can takes weeks or longer.

A debate on science policy by the respective candidates would be far more useful.

By: dean

dean — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:33:12 +0000

I wasn’t aiming at Science Debate. I don’t think any candidate will ever agree to those terms. I meant (and didn’t say well at all, I see) that unless care is taken a science “debate” would be as worthless as a hog on ice.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:13:14 +0000

Dean, that is not a question at all. Science Debate Dot Org has been around for years, and their intention is to have a real debate. So far candidates have pretty much avoided that.

By: dean

dean — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:27:24 +0000

The first question to answer is whether it would be an actual debate or the crap that the current political climate passes off as debate.
I would prefer to see an actual interview, in which the candidates are required to actually address and answer questions about how they view science, how they judge issues, what they understand, what they don’t, and what the view as the role good, solid, scientific results will play in the decision making process of their administration.

By: hoary puccoon

hoary puccoon — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 12:57:14 +0000

I’m not convinced a presidential science debate is a very good idea. It’s easy to come up with plausible but bogus arguments at the podium. Creationists do it all the time. It’s only in the field and the laboratory, where the hard work of science gets done, that the intellectual (and, for that matter, moral) bankruptcy of the anti-science arguments become apparent.

I shudder to think what it would be like for an earnest, somewhat scientifically literate, candidate to get blind-sided by, for instance, Rick Santorem. Santorem is probably brilliant at the Gish Gallop. And if the moderator- male or female- tried to rein him in, it would look to a lot of the audience like partisanship.

By: StevoR

StevoR — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 10:35:50 +0000

Phil Plait – aka the Bad Astronomer – would reasoned, polite, very intelligent blogger and thinker who I think would make a great choice.

I tried to suggest this there but the #@!#@!! computer system thingummywhatsit there wouldn’t let me.

I think you’d also be a good choice too, Greg Laden!

By: Ole Phat Stu

Ole Phat Stu — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:28:58 +0000

Neil deGrasse Tyson please 🙂

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 17:06:09 +0000

Emil, actually, you don’t get to tell me what to do, what to write, what to spend my time on. The fact that you think this is somehow your role is troubling. I think you should reconsider why that is the case, what brings you to think that this is OK.

Having said that, as is sometimes the case with comments like the one you made, which includes a number of valid points as well as a number of serious misconceptions (or at least points of confusion) and that address an important issue, I was actually moved to write a blog post in response. So, in the end, you’ll be getting a lot more than you bargained for!

I hope to have a productive and forward moving discussion on this issue. The question at hand, here, arising from my comment on sex bias in naming names, is part of an ongoing discussion, and the blog post I’m writing will bring that together with some other lines of thought.

I am going out in one hour and will not be back until late, and I’ve got a major obligation this week and I owe some people some other writing that I’m late on, so don’t expect this post to come out until late tonight, and if not late tonight, mid week at the earliest.

Stay tuned. Mean time, if you feel moved to write something on your blog about this, send me the link!