Creationists vs Actual Paleoanthropologists

>>8444712
I doubt you'll find anything of the sort outside of the forum of public debate.

Not every scientist is an consummate public speaker, they also tend to be very busy. They have no time to correct or inform someone who intends to use sophistry and misinformation to appropriate their own ends, nor could a scientist ever hope to change the mind of someone who thinks this way with factual articles.

It's just more efficient to ignore them and slap them down when they try to encroach.

File: hercules-and-the-hydra-pollaiuolo-detail.jpg (171KB, 287x401px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 287x401px

>>8445602
But wouldn't doing so just encourage them to rise again, like some kind of Hydra of ignorance?

>>8444712
http://www.4chan.org/rules#sci3

>>8444712
All the fucking time. It's fucking old. Most people don't so as to avoid giving them attention. The 'debate' is over, nobody but the neckbeardiest of the fedora tippers cares about such things

Actual confrontations can be a bit disappointing. A number of times creationists will employ the gish gallop tactic, that is spewing so much bullshit so fast, that no one can hope to disprove it all

>>8444712
It's rare that an actual scientist is familiar enough with the twisting arguments of different strands of creationism to just run down a list and debunk it.

>>8446948
But this is literally true

OP, you do realize that not all Creationists are young earth morons like Kent Hovind and his ilk, right?

>>8447542
>not all xs fallacy
I acknowledge this, but they seem to be the only ones making a fuss at the moment.

>>8445647
Would a cook debate a painter on which flour is best to use?
It devaluates the field.