Science debate

2008

You would think that the candidates would welcome the exposure, wouldn't you?
And although the majority of the citizens would like to see such a debate, the candidates hide. This should tell us all we need to know about all three of them.

From the Sciencedebate 2008 newsletter...

"First, a review of our primary season strategy and what we learned. We made this invitation as attractive as possible.
We recruited every organization that we six core volunteers (2 screenwriters, 2 scientists, a philosopher and a science journalist) have contact with, and we reached out and signed on 37,500 individuals.
We emphasized that it was about policy, not a science quiz. We took the intimidating word "debate" out of the invitations.
We joined with PBS and targeted an influential, educated demographic, through PBS's 350 member stations, that are well-attuned to science and policy issues and could be very advantageous to court. We enlisted high-profile supporters to make video appeals.We recruited America's leading science organizations and universities to sign on.
We proposed not one, but four dates - one in Philadelphia and three in Portland.
We told them the format was entirely flexible; it didn't have to be a debate, it could be a forum similar to the "Compassion Forum" the democratic candidates recently attended in Pennsylvania, discussing matters of faith and values. What matters is that they come.
We even told them we would show them our questions a week in advance, so they could prepare. That's like showing all our cards.
When even that didn't work, several Nobel laureates joined with the Chairman of Intel and the CEO of the World Wildlife Fund in a joint email that emphasized that this could simply be a "conversation," it should not take undue preparation and was important for the country.
Only the McCain campaign gave us the courtesy of a formal response: a polite decline that left the door open for the general election."