Evaluation of General Sources

It took me quite some time to settle on a story. I wasn't finding too many debate topics, as so much of science manifests in the news as an announcement of a discovery with comments. But I'm a biologist with specific interest on a very controversial biological topic: evolution. In and of itself, controversy surrounds this topic and swift argument comes from theists. But it doesn't get better than Bill Nye the Science Guy debating the founder of the Creationist museum; this event took place February 4th, 2014 and no, it wasn't too good to be true. I made sure.

Lacey, Dan, "Bill Nye Versus Ken Ham Debate Painting" 2/5/2014 via Flickr. Attribution 2.0 Non-Commercial License.

This hyperlink takes you to an NPR page in which the debate video is embedded. This is likely the best source for the story.

• The URL is a .org. This domain is a reliable source for information as many are non-profit organizations and schools. NPR is also generally a credible source of news and information, and the part of the source I'm discussing at the moment is the literally the debate itself, so I don't think the URL is a problem here.
• The author would be the debators, Bill Nye and Ken Ham. Nye is a very respectable, qualified, and renowned scientist, while Ham is a devout Creationist and a founder of the Creationist museum, which probably speaks of his rep as well.
• The page was last updated on February 4th, 2014 - the same day it was originally posted, but a different time. All the links still work and nothing has really "changed" since the debate took place. Everything that was said in the debate was still said and can't really be changed.
• Ham invited Nye to the debate, so I suppose part of the purpose is just to have the debate itself. Whether for public or personal interest, I can't say. But the individual speakers each have the interest of getting their ideas out there and essentially trying to convince people to believe their sides.
• Well, it's a video, so it's kind of all graphic. But within the video, the speakers each have images and video that they refer to throughout the debate, and these add credibility to each side's argument and keeps the audience engaged.
• Well, it's the debate, so it's pretty good about showing both sides. I feel like these questions were definitely not composed with this type of source in mind.
• Throughout the debate, both reference certain outside sources on the issues - Nye's being scientific fact that can be googled, and Ham's being the Bible. No links in a video, I'm afraid. It's in the air whether the latter is reputable, but the former's sources (like hard fact and himself) are pretty reputable.

I do believe this one will be a better source for the questions posed. I wanted to know why Bill Nye would agree to debate about science, of which he's certain, and luckily I found the perfect article.

• This URL is a .com, which does tend to compromise credibility. However, because this is a CNN source, it's also a pretty reliable piece of news. It's also an opinion piece by Nye himself, so it's not like some random Joe is just writing some stuff.
• The author is definitely Bill Nye. He's an Emmy-Award winning science educator, scientist, and engineer. He's qualified.
• The only date on the page is February 4th, 2014. But as was the case above, all the links still work, and Nye certainly hasn't changed his opinion on the matter in the least. So the information is still in date.
• The purpose is for Nye to explain his reasons for accepting Ham's debate proposal. Many people were wondering, so the piece likely answers some questions. It does promote his viewpoints on science, and why he thinks the subject is so very important.
• There's a picture of the debate participants, but that's really as far as graphics go. The image's purpose was likely to get people excited for the debate before it took place.
• Nye is definitely pretty biased towards his opinion, but that's the purpose for the debate. If Nye's view is true, then virtually everyone profits from knowing the origin of life. Religious people would probably be a little sad, though.
• There are a few links. One goes to Nye's opponent, Ken Ham's reason for the debate, and one goes to a place where the debate can be viewed. The links are definitely well connected to the topic.

I'm getting the feeling that my sources aren't exactly "typical" sources, but I think they're very accurate, and will do me good in constructing my project.