Bill Nye "the Science Guy" (one of my heroes, TBH), is going to debate Ken Ham, CEO of Answers in Genesis, on February 4 (the day after my birthday - not that it's relevant). Dan Arel of the Richard Dawkins Foundation thinks Bill Nye shouldn't debate Ken Ham because agreeing to a debate not only gives Ham's position an air of credibility it doesn't deserve (i.e., it presumes that there's something worth debating), it also gives Ham some free advertising to peddle his snake oil.
 "Ham on Nye." I'm very proud of this joke. |
I wasn't sure what to think at first, but as I allowed thoughts to ruminate in my head, I found myself agreeing with Arel more and more. Ken Ham is a joke. This isn't a matter of "religion vs. atheism," but simply "evidence vs. nonsense." Dan Arel thinks the fact that Bill Nye isn't a biologist disqualifies him as "a qualified candidate to defend evolution," but that doesn't concern me much, as long as Nye's facts are correct - and I have no reason to believe they aren't. Bill Nye, as Arel notes, "will attempt to use proper science and reason" in this debate, and that's good enough for me.
Again, I think Arel has a point. Agreeing to debate Ken Ham is like agreeing to debate a member of the Flat Earth society. The problem, I think, is that we get confused as to what "open-mindedness" means. It doesn't mean we accept all ideas as equally good or true. It doesn't mean we show respect for all ideas equally. It certainly doesn't mean we accept ideas blindly. I've heard "you're being closed-minded" as a response to the demand for evidence more times than I care to say. But being open-minded necessarily requires us to demand evidence. It means I'm open to your ideas, and even willing to accept them as true, if and only if you show me sufficient evidence that demonstrates the veracity of your ideas. Saying that Ken Ham isn't worth the time to debate isn't being closed-minded. Ham has had ample opportunity to back up his nonsense, and all we've got is, well, the same thing we're going to get from Ken Ham on February 4: cheesy phrases, fallacies, and pathetic reasoning. People will get Ham on Nye...
... with cheese.
(Okay, the joke's not that good.)
Open-mindedness means I examine ideas and propositions as objectively as I can. Closed-mindedness means I have a prejudice or preconception or a leaning toward a particular view that obscures my ability to evaluate the evidence rationally and clearly. Open-mindedness means we go where logic leads. Closed-mindedness means we try to twist logic to make our beliefs appear credible, while we shut our ears and close our eyes to the evidence out of fear that it will debunk the beliefs we want to be true.
I say Bill Nye shouldn't debate Ken Ham not because I'm closed-minded, but because I've examined the evidence with an open mind, and found Ken Ham to be full of baloney.
Baloney! Get it? Eh? Eh?
