Arent scientists really just afraid to debate proponents of intelligent design?
No, scientists actually thrive on debate, but only according to the norms and standards of scientific investigation and discourse. Scientists are bound by existing facts while the opponents are not constrained by sticking to the verifiable evidence and data. Scientists see no pointand much dangerin pitting a scientific concept like evolution against a non-scientific article of religious faith like intelligent design. By agreeing to debate evolution, scientists would be offering proponents of intelligent design a veneer of scientific respectability that has not been earned in the rough-and-tumble of everyday science. They also buy into a situation where the public might expect an either-or outcome between science and religion.
