[abrown28]

a) The debate is happening whether Bill Nye takes part or not.

b) If proponents of proposition A are unwilling to debate proponents of proposition B then proponents of A will be look like they don't believe in their proposition. You need to be willing to defend your beliefs.

c) Debating someone does not legitimize their proposition. I believe you are legitimizing their proposition if you refuse to debate them.

[KGIII]

Arguably, at some point debate becomes futile. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

[abrown28]

I agree you will almost never debate your opponent into a different point of view but you can change the beliefs of the audience sometimes.

For instance I don't mind if you change your opinion on the merit of debating creationists but I'm hoping to sway anyone else that reads this to my point of view.

[KGIII]

Yeah, at some point I no longer have time or energy for that. I wish you luck, though!

You may be able to change some audience views but you're more dedicated than I. I've tried reason. I am a scientist. I have explained scientific method and had so many bizarre responses that I guess I've just learned to not engage when people demonstrate willful ignorance.

Honestly, it's not even always from the people you expect. Not that long ago, someone was telling me that sea levels were going to rise by 54' by 2050 and that it was 'a proven science fact.' I gave them a whole bunch of data and citations but I'm a mathematician and not a climate scientist - thus they decided I was an uninformed liar and declared themselves the victor.

I was pretty baffled by that one, actually. I'm really certain that AGW is a serious problem. I'm also really certain the sea isn't going to rise that much by 2050. I know, because I read the research and understand it well enough.

I don't know... Maybe I'm jaded and disillusioned.

[mulmen]

You're falling in to the same trap I think Bill Nye fell into. There are not always precisely two equally valid opinions. Forcing debate to fit the assumption that exactly two perspectives are equally valid perpetuates the creation of baseless theories for the purpose of debate itself. See: cable news.