Calls for “debate” on subjects like vaccines aren’t really invitations to communicate with a large audience. Many reasons for this, one of which is Brandolini’s Law:
The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.
The whole thing is a set-up.
It’s an asymmetric proposition.
The format they want doesn’t allow for the slow, methodical scientific processes needed to reach sound conclusions and refute misinformation.
At the same time, participation by scientists creates an environment where claims that mimic scientific rigor, acquire legitimacy.
On top of that it isn’t actually a debate. There’s no moderator agreed on by both parties, no standard for the dividing line between fact and opinion. Those are sort of essential for debate!
Robert McNees
Frank