Would you watch a boxing match between Mike Tyson and some rando pulled out of a grocery store? By setting up the match, with equal time and equal terms between these two opposing ideas, the host is implicitly saying that these ideas are starting on near-equal footing. If you try to give every random crazy idea equal time with the truth, the truth gets drowned out.

The truth is subtle, nuanced, and complex. It takes long, in-depth study to understand. It's not always obvious to a layperson who is "debunking" whom. Just as we don't automatically expect a beautiful or useful crop to outcompete noxious weeds just because we like them better, we should not expect the truth to outcompete crazy in 20-minute podcast segments. Crazy is much better at spreading into brains than the truth, because that's exactly the selection pressure that led the crazy to evolve in the first place. True ideas don't evolve by being extremely good at sticking in your brain; they evolve when humans sit down and realize that that's not the appropriate arena for them.