Call for Evolutionists for radio show

I'm pretty sure it was Kenneth Miller who was being quoted, but one "evolutionist" said that despite creationist debates being deceptive circuses, he still takes every opportunity he can to debate and to address creationists. It's an opportunity to teach. Indeed, in his classes he's lecturing to students, many of whom are either bored or distracted, but in a debate when he speaks he has the audience's full attention. What teacher could pass up an opportunity like that?Of course, Miller is good, really good. I certainly know that I am not.

To illustrate the need for being able to research the opponent's claim in order make a proper response and how the debate format prevents that, there's the case of the 1985 Long Beach debate, Gish and H. Morris vs Awbrey and Thwaites. In response to Awbrey & Thwaites well-documented examples of the ICR making extensive use of quotes from out-dated and superceded sources, Morris proudly announced that a recent 1976 NASA document, written well into the space age, used direct measurements of meteoric dust to show that the moon is only thousands of years old, because if the moon were really billions of years old then it would be covered with a layer of dust over 200 feet thick.Now, if I had to respond to that, I wouldn't be able to. So I wrote to Morris for his sources and Gish sent me a letter by Harold Slusher in which Slusher worked out a formula into which he had plugged in values from that "1976" NASA document. Then one day in the government stacks of my university's library, I stumbled upon that NASA document. It was actually a 1967[/i] (nineteen sixty-seven) printing of papers submitted at a 1965 conference, which was all well before the first US moon landing, Surveyor I. The "direct measurements" were readings from a microphone attached to a membrane in a satellite orbitting the earth, a method that was later found to give inaccurate results. And Slusher misused his source, plugging in a factor of 10,000 that his source said did not apply and another factor of 100 which broke the rules of mathematics; when corrected for those extraneous factors, his layer of about 280 feet shrank down to a third of an inch.Fred Williams, that is the answer that I would have given to Morris' moon dust claim. But in the format of the debate, there is never enough time to do the research that is needed to properly respond to a wild creationist claim.