This will make sense if you are debating one-on-one within the context of a well-organized debate. However, they are not looking to debate, but to amplify their message in a well-known platform, like a big fishing net that catches whatever it can drag to the surface.
I agree that people should learn all the time and as much as they can, but they don’t respect the science and would use this to give weight to their argument while trying to look as calm and collected so that some viewers would believe that they know what they are talking about.
You shouldn’t engage them. You play on your rules, not theirs. I like the analogy of “It is like playing chess with a pigeon: Because it doesn’t matter how masterfully tutored you’ve been in the theory, how sound your thinking and strategy is, or how good you are at the game in general, the pigeon is always going to knock over the chess pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it won anyway.”
This will make sense if you are debating one-on-one within the context of a well-organized debate. However, they are not looking to debate, but to amplify their message in a well-known platform, like a big fishing net that catches whatever it can drag to the surface.
I agree that people should learn all the time and as much as they can, but they don’t respect the science and would use this to give weight to their argument while trying to look as calm and collected so that some viewers would believe that they know what they are talking about.
You shouldn’t engage them. You play on your rules, not theirs. I like the analogy of “It is like playing chess with a pigeon: Because it doesn’t matter how masterfully tutored you’ve been in the theory, how sound your thinking and strategy is, or how good you are at the game in general, the pigeon is always going to knock over the chess pieces, crap on the board and strut around like it won anyway.”