I very much believe in the no-win scenario.
For example, "debating" settled science with people who will, under no circumstances, accept evidence outside of the locked box of their atavistic faith. People who will, under no circumstances, change their minds.
The Bill Nye-Ken Ham Debate Was a Nightmare for Science
...It was like watching the Broncos play the Seahawks. Nye never had a chance. Ham won this debate months ago, when Nye agreed to participate. By last Friday, when I spoke with Ham, Nye hadn’t even arrived in Kentucky, but Ham was already basking in the glow of victory (Nye didn’t respond to my request for comment). “The response,” Ham told me, “has been absolutely phenomenal.” He talked about the media attention. He talked about how professional the stage was going to look. He talked more about the media attention. “It’s going to create a lot of discussion. I think that’s very healthy,” said Ham, in reference to the raging scientific debate over whether evolution actually happened. “In many ways aggressive atheists have shut down that discussion.” But, Ham continued, “the public wants to hear about” origins. Fortunately, Nye has given them that chance. ...Ham had nothing to lose. When you exist on the cultural fringe and make your living by antagonizing established authority, there’s no form of media attention you don’t love. All Ham had to do was sit still for two-and-a-half hours, sound vaguely professional, and pander occasionally to his base. Sure, if you listened closely, what Ham was saying made absolutely no scientific sense. But debate is a format of impressions, not facts. Ham sounded like a reasonable human being, loosely speaking, and that’s what mattered....
It has been nearly a century since Clarence Darrow mopped the floor with William Jennings Bryan Dayton, Tennessee:
And nearly a century later, from ACORN to Bengaaaahzi! to Creationism, there is no upside to debating these people about the various articles of their imbecile faith. None. Because as this because as this blog has meticulously documented:
As "Meet the Press" continues to devolve into the test-pattern that great-aunt Muriel falls asleep to while everyone under 90 busies themselves with other things, it is once again worth mentioning why the marginal utility of debating Conservatives is zero.Because Conservatives do not understand what "Conservatism" means anymore, and because Conservatives do not understand what "debate" means anymore...
In this Year of Our Lord 2014, there are no fence-straddlers anymore. Shirts and skins have chosen up sides and there is no one left to convince and so engaging these (as one long-forgotten wag once put it) "terrified lunatics walled up behind an ideology which demands 100% supplication, permits no new information in and declares all Reality to be its sworn enemy" does nothing but lend them your credibility and oxygenate their cause with your energy.
Because fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding.
So for God's sake, stop feeding it and calling it edutainment