Suddenly, we see a number of articles about how to cope with creationist nonsense. This is good; opposing creationism isn’t enough, we also need plans for how to oppose creationism.

Berkeley has updated their instructive website, Understanding Evolution. Where before it was focused largely on providing a resource to school teachers, now it has been expanded with additional exercises for anyone to try. Most of these are relatively simple and geared towards an early age group, but I think any creationist who wants to criticize evolution ought to try them out. If they aren’t clear on the concept (which is always true), the examples here should help them out.

We also need to get those people who don’t dwell on computers all day, and Carl Zimmer mentions a new museum exhibit, Explore Evolution, that’s going to be on display at various Midwestern science museums (Yes! The Science Museum of Minnesota is among them!). The exhibit zooms in on specific research projects that are dependent on and explained by evolutionary theory.

Via the Panda’s Thumb, the NYT has an article, Challenged by Creationists, Museums Answer Back, about how museums are specifically training their staff to handle creationists appropriately (Sean Carroll picks some substantial nits about the use of “theory” in the article, but in general it’s good). It’s scary how often creationists turn up at these places—the article mentions organized tours led by creationists that show up at museums to give their spin to the exhibits—but perhaps it’s even more scary that the people who work as docents need to get more training in science education.

The Commissar, that fellow who is single-handedly trying to show that you can be a deranged ‘winger and still be sensible about science, has written a guide to addressing creationists, The Wedgie Document. It’s good advice for one-on-one encounters with your creationist brother-in-law.

One thing bothers me slightly about all of these recommendation, an omission that we’ve been making for years: the repeated suggestion that we have to treat creationists gently, with respect for their ideas. This is true for personal interactions—you aren’t going to be successful at persuading someone to come over to the side of reason if you begin by ridiculing him. It is good tactics to be gentle with individuals, but it is poor strategy to be delicate with the larger movement and its leaders and representatives.

I say, whomp ‘em hard with ridicule.

When you’re dealing with someone you meet on the street, one approach is useful, but when the guy is a Kent Hovind (well-known, vocal creationist; Pooflingers Anonymous is a good place to go to see how deeply insane that man is) or a Timothy Birdnow (delusional self-nominated spokesman for anti-evolution), it is not appropriate to be kind. I’ve been called “brutal” more than once for my cruel put-downs of these jokers, but I think that has to be an essential part (but definitely not the whole) of our strategy for defeating pseudo- and anti-science.

The Kent Hovinds of the world are never going to be convinced by the evidence. They’ve been exposed to it all repeatedly; they don’t listen. While we must dissect their claims with objective evidence (that’s the strength of science, after all), we gain nothing by treating them with respect at the same time—in fact, we undermine ourselves, because their supporters, who don’t give a damn about the evidence either, will just see their representative being taken seriously, and take that as validation.

The links up top give good suggestions. If you’re going to contend with creationists, you need to be informed and competent, be ready to engage the ideas, and be willing to do a lot of tedious, step-by-step explanation of very basic concepts, and also be willing to go over and over the same old oft-refuted nonsense.

But don’t be timid about calling a crank a crank, either.