Thanks for that Robert. Perhaps you could shoot me a link to what you are talking about with Antiseptic etc.

I guess I've been becoming progressively more sensitised to the issue of how these sites work and what makes them tick. I think we do much better here than most of the mainstream media sites, and also most blogs, but....

When I started OLO I had a vision of spirited, but reasonably polite debate, a bit like you might get at a Liberal Party, or presumably Labor Party, branch meeting. I expected there to be nutters and know-alls, but ultimately a spirit of goodwill and tolerance. It's not necessarily how it has panned out, and I'm wondering whether too laissez faire an approach might have caused that. So I have been tightening up on thread creation for a while.

I'm not sure that asking for "evidence" to disprove the Genesis account will produce anything more than perfectly circular arguments, since the positions taken can only be faith-based, rather than evidence-based.

But it is still an issue, as you rightly point out, in that creationism itself is moving steadily into the political arena.

I'd say, give it a run. Letting some sunlight fall on views other than your own is one of the strengths of this forum.

I think you should have a post written by one of the many scientist that shows how futile and unscientific evolution is. Both creation and evolution are faith based beliefs. Any honest scientist knows at best evolution is a flawed theory. The marginalizing of the creation case is identical to the marginalization of the thousands of scientist that know that the theory of man made gw is unproven and a load of crap. In both cases 'the science is established' and all else are heretics. The only problem is that true science demands true evidence. In both evolution and gw the story continually changes to fit the politically correct dogma of the day. Maybe just maybe you might consider that the many Americans who decide to demand some evidence before swallowing the dogmas of evolution might be a little smarter than you give them credit for.

Graham! Its your site!. Creationism needs to be kept under control, with the conspiracies, to which are quite clear, in what christianties main goal is: they want the whole world to become under their laws. Its not just a belief, its a push of an idea, with political drives, which are not everyone's point of view.etc. I thought Sundays was the for preaching? This site IMO, is for facts! not fiction. I agree there should be a section for religious debate, but not in main stream reality. Religion should be a personal thing between god and ones self, not forcing or conning people to join their world domination.
Higher inter-elects want a site to where one can share ideas for the future of mankind, and not be told that we are evil all the time. Creationists make people feel that we are unworthy of pure existence. They are not sharing, they are forcing, like history has shown us.

Religious fundamentalists are the main causes of world unrest, and its spiraling out of control. Mountains of facts are available!

Creationists V,s evolutionists! This is not the case! Their annoying!
If we keep going around and around with such things of the past, mankind will get no-where! and whats bigger, is the fact that these people don't have a life! They just whinge about the coming of the end.
Like we need that now days.

I would like to see creationists save their energy for church where it belongs, and in the realm,s of reality.

EVO

Who said,"I may not agree with what you say,but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

What the religious folk must realise is that the reality of evolution is neither a confirmation or a denial of spirituality.The universe is far more diverse and subtle than our pathetic homage to an all powerful being.The concept of God eminates from our own insecurities.We have to progress from our philosophies based on fear.

There is censorship, and there is maintaining the standard of debate. When a discussion veers into creationism, it invariably becomes a match between people shouting evidence, and people shouting dogma back.

Unless there is some new, clear evidence which puts the theory of natural selection and adaptation in doubt, I think it's a topic best left to other, religious, discussion sites.

By way of comparison, if you wouldn't post a discussion of this: www.theonion.com/content/node/39512

...then a discussion of creationism isn't appropriate, either.