Quote:

From the University of California, Irvine, Dr. Kent Hovind, a well-known defender of the faith and authority on creationism, debates Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic magazine and defender of the evolution theory



Here is Dr. Kent Hovind's web site: Creation Science Evangelism

Here is Dr. Michael Shermer's web site: Skeptic Magazine

The best one-liner goes to Dr. Kent Hovind. "An aithest can't find God for the same reason a theif can't find a cop."

The debate was a bit dull. I am tempted to say, painfully dull. With a little more organization, a much better production could have been put together.

Dr. Kent Hovind is to the far extreame of the spectrum and seemed, to me, to take a number of postions to place creationism in mainstream science. Such positions, I think, only hurt his credibility. He came off as very hostile and not as one would expect a Spirit-filled Christian to act.

Dr. Michael Shermer actually came off as much more humble than his Christian opponent. However he made some assesments of the Bible that are incorrect and showed his lack of theological training. Many of his scientific explanations came off as a bit weak in light of the explanations or criticism offered by his opponant.

I found myself raising my eyebrows with both of them and wishing to see a debate between parties much closer to the middle. Dr. Hovind believes Creation Science belongs in science classes. Dr. Shermer believes it should be confined to Bible or Theology classes.

I see problems with both of those positions. Since religion cannot be required instruction in public schools, creation science in the science classroom would make such science classes optional. And of course, science is based on observation and hypothesis, while religious faith plays a major role in Creation science. Yet Creation science shouldn't be confined to Bible or Theology classes since creation is more than just a religious belief and as a religious belief is held by various religions.

I believe the moderate position is to teach Creation Science in the context of a Philosophy of Science curriculum. There are certain areas of study that science cannot explore simply due to the limits of science itself. These areas can be explored and discussed within the realm of Philosophy of Science. Such a class can be an elective and thereby not violate the establisment clause of the First Amendment.
_________________________
I reserve the humble right to be wrong.

Link > Shane's Page - update in progress